Skip to main content

Full text of "Notes on English divines"

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 






VOL. I. 






Ci)e» Folumes 





The following sheets were arranged for the 
press in a great measure bj mj lamented sister, 
Mrs. Henry Nelson Coleridge. They are reprinted 
for the most part from the third and fourth volumes 
of The Literary Eemains' of her revered Father, 
a re-arrangement of which work, with such addi- 
tional matter as appeared worthy of preservation, 
she had long projected and partly executed. Of 
this enlarged collection the 'Notes and Lectures 
on Shakspeare,' &c., which appeared in 1849, 
formed the first portion. The Theological Margi- 
nalia were to follow. It has been thought advisable 
to present the * Notes on English Divines,* contained 
in the present publication, in a separate form. 
Of the Notes on Baxter the first series, which 
exhibit the author's mind on the same important 


topics at a somewhat earlier period, is now printed 
for the first time ; and there are some other 
additions of less importance. For the character 
of these Eemains, and the motives which have led 
to their publication, the reader is referred to the 
Prefatory remarks of the original Editor, to whom 
also the few editorial annotations which appear at 
the foot of the page are to be assigned, when not 
otherwise distinguished. 


St. Mark's College, Chelsea. 
Dec. 20, 1852. 



By henry nelson COLERIDGE. 

Fob a statement of the circnmstances under which 
the collection of Mr. Coleridge's Literary Remains was 
undertaken, the Reader is referred to the Preface to the 
two preceding Volumes published in 1836. * But the 
graver character of the general contents of this Volume, 
and of that which will immediately follow it, seems to 
justify the Editor in soliciting particular attention to a 
few additional remarks. 

Although the Author in his will contemplated the 
publication of some at least of the numerous notes left 
by him on the margins and blank spaces of books and 
pamphlets, he most certainly wrote the notes themselves 
without any purpose beyond that of delivering his mind 
of the thoughts and aspirations suggested by the text 
under perusal. His books, that is, any person's books — 
even those from a circulating library — were to him, 
whilst reading them, as dear friends ; he conversed with 
them as with their authors, praising, or censuring, or 
qualifying, as the open page seemed to give him cause ; 
little solicitous in so doing to draw summaries or to 
strike balances of literary merit, but seeking rather to 

* Reprinted in the first volume of the Notes and Lectures upon 
Shakapeare. Pickering, 1849. 


detect and appreciate the moving principle or moral 
life, ever one and single, of the work in reference to 
absolute truth. Thus employed he had few reserves, 
but in general poured forth, as in a confessional, all his 
mind upon every subject, — ^not keeping back any doubt 
or conjecture which at the time and for the purpose 
seemed worthy of consideration. In probing another^s 
heart he laid his hand upon his own. He thought 
pious frauds the worst of all frauds, and the system of 
economising truth too near akin to the corruption of 
it to be generally compatible with the Job-like integrity 
of a true Christian's conscience. Further, he distin- 
guished so strongly between that internal faith which 
lies at the base of, and supports, the whole moral and 
religious being of man, and the belief, as historically 
true, of several incidents and relations found, or sup- 
posed to be foimd, in the text of the Scriptures, that he 
habitually exercised a liberty of criticism with respect 
to the latter, which will probably seem objectionable to 
many of his readers in this country. * 

His friends have always known this to be the fact ; 
and he vindicated this so openly that it would be folly 
to attempt to conceal it : nay, he pleaded for it so 
earnestly— as the only middle path of safety and peace 
between a godless disregard of the unique and trans- 
cendant character of the Bible taken generally, and that 
scheme of interpretation, scarcely less adverse to the 
pure spirit of Christian wisdom, which wildly arrays 
our faith in opposition to our reason, and inculcates the 
sacrifice of the latter to the former, — ^that to suppress 
this important part of his solenm convictions would be 
to misrepresent and betray him. For he threw up his 
hands in dismay at the language of some of our modem 
divinity on this point: — ^as if a faith not founded on 

• See Table Talk, p. 178, 2nd edit. 


incdglit were aught else than a specious Dame for wilful 
poBitiveness ; — as if the Father of Lights could require, 
or would accept, from the only one of his creatures 
whom he had endowed with reason the sacrifice of 
fools ! Did Coleridge, therefore, mean that the doctrines 
revealed in the Scriptures were to be judged according 
to their supposed harmony or discrepancy with the 
evidence of the senses, or the deductions of the mere 
Understanding from that evidence ? Exactly the reverse : 
he disdained to argue even against Transubetantiation 
on such a ground, well knowing and loudly proclaiming 
its utter weakness and instability. But it was a leading 
principle in all his moral and intellectual views to 
assert the existence in all men equally of a power or 
faculty superior to, and independent o^ the external 
senses: in this power or faculty he recognised that 
image of Grod in which man was made ; and he could 
as little understand how faith, the indivisibly joint 
act or efflux of our reason and our will, should be 
at variance with one of its factors or elements, as 
how the Author and Upholder of all truth should 
be in contradiction to himself. He trembled at the 
dreadful dogma which rests God*s right to man*s obedi- 
ence on the fact of his almighty power, — a position 
falsely inferred from a misconceived illustration of 
St. Paul's, and which is less humbling to the creature 
than blasphemous of the Creator; and of the awless 
doctrine that God might, if he had so pleased, have 
given to man a religion which to human intelligence 
should not be rational, and exacted his faith in it — 
Coleridge's whole middle and later life was one deep 
and solemn denial. He believed in no God in the very 
idea of whose existence absolute truth, perfect goodness, 
and infinite wisdom, were not elements essentially 
necessary and everlastingly copresent. 
Thus minded, he sought to justify the ways of Ciod 


to man in the only way in which they can be justified 
to any one who deals honestly with his conscience, 
namely, by showing, where possible, their consequence 
from, and in all cases their consistency with, the ideas 
or truths of the pure reason which is the same in all 
men. With what success he laboured for thirty years 
in this mighty cause of Christian philosophy, the 
readers of his other works, especially the Aids to 
Reflection, will judge: if measured by the number of 
resolved points of detail his progress may seem small ; 
but if tested by the weight and grasp of the principles 
which he has established, it may be confidently said 
that since Christianity had a name few men have gone 
so far. If ever we are to find firm footing in Biblical 
criticism between the extremes (how often meeting !) 
of Socinianism and Popery; — if the indisputable facts of 
physical science are not for ever to be left in a sort of 
admitted antagonism to the supposed assertions of 
Scripture ; — ^if ever the Christian duty of faith in Qod 
through Christ is to be reconciled with the religious 
service of a being gifted by the same God with reason 
and a will, and subjected to a conscience, — ^it must be 
effected by the aid, and in the light, of those truths of 
deepest philosophy which in all Mr. Coleridge's works, 
published or unpublished, present themselves to the 
reader with an almost affecting reiteration. But to do 
justice to those works and adequately to appreciate the 
Author's total mind upon any given point, a cursory 
perusal is insufficient; study and comprehension are 
requisite to an accurate estimate of the relative value of 
any particular denial or assertion ; and the apparently 
desultory and discontinuous form of the observations 
now presented to the Eeader more especially calls for the 
exercise of his patience and thoughtful circumspection. 
With this view the Reader is requested to observe 
the dates which, in some instances, the Editor has been 


able to affix to the notes with certainty. Most of those 
on Jeremy Taylor belong to the year 1810, and were 
especially designed for the perusal of Charles Lamb. 
Those on Field were written about 1814 ; on Hacket in 
1818; on Donne in 1812 and 1829; on the Pilgrim's 
Progress in 1833 ; and on Hooker and the Book of 
Common Prayer between 1820 and 1830.* Coleridge's 
mind was a growing and accumulating mind to the last, 
his whole life one of inquiry and progressive insight, 
and the dates of his opinions are therefore in some cases 
important, and in all interesting. 

The Editor is deeply sensible of his responsibility in 
publishing this Volume ; as to which he can only say, 
in addition to a reference to the general authority given 
by the Author, that to the best of his knowledge and 
judgment he has not permitted any thing to appear 
before the public which Mr. Coleridge saw reason to 
retract ; and further express his hope and belief that, 
with such allowance for defects inherent in the nature 
of the work as may rightfully be expected from every 
really liberal mind, nothing contained in the following 
pages can fairly be a ground of offence to any one. 

It only remains to be added that the materials 
used in the compilation of this Volume were for the 
greatest part commimicated by Mr. Gillman ; and that 
the rest were furnished by Mr. Wordsworth, the Eev. 
Derwent Coleridge, the Eev. Edward Coleridge, and 
the Editor. 


March 26, 188a 

• The notes on the Book of Common Prayer will appear with those 
on Luther and other literary Remains in a forthcoming volume.— D. C. 



For some remarks on the character of this publication, 
the Editor begs to refer the Beader to the Preface to 
the third volume of these Eemains. That volume and the 
present are expressly connected together as one work. 

The various materials arranged in the following pages 
were preserved, and kindly placed in the Editor's hands, 
by Mr. Southey, Mr. Green, Mr. Gillman, Mr. Alfred 
Elwyn of Philadelphia, United States, Mr. Money, Mr. 
Hartley Coleridge, and the Rev. Edward Coleridge ; and 
to those gentlemen the Editor's best acknowledgments 
are due. 

H. N. C. 
Lincoln's Inn, 

May 9, 1839. 









,, FIELD 35 

„ DONNE 65 




„ HACKET 140 


,, THE pilgrim's PROGRESS 330 




Page 67. 

Mr. Travers excepted against Mr. Hooker, for that in one 
of his sermons he declared, ' That the assurance of what we 
believe by the word of Gk>d, is not to us so certain as that 
which we perceive by sense.' And Mr. Hooker confessetli 
he said so, and endeavours to justify it by the reasons 

Thebe is, I confess, a shade of doubt on my 
mind as to this position of Hooker*s. Yet I do not 
deny that it expresses a truth. The question in 
my mind is, only, whether it adequately expresses 
the whole truth. The ground of my doubt lies iu 
my inability to compare two things that differ in 
kind. It is impossible that any conviction of the 
reason, even where no act of the will advenes as 
a co-efficient, should possess the vividness of an 
immediate object of the senses ; for the vividness is 
given by sensation. Equally impossible is it that 
any truth of the super-sensuous reason should possess 

* The references arc to Mr. Keble's edition (1836.^ — £d. 
VOL. I. -ft 


the evidence of the pure sense. Even the mathe- 
matician does not find the same evidence in the 
results of transcendental algehra as in the demon- 
strations of simple geometry. But has he less 
assurance? In answer to Hooker's argument I 
say, — that God refers to our sensible experience to 
aid our will by the vividness of sensible impressions, 
and also to aid our understanding of the truths 
revealed, — not to increase the conviction of their 
certainty where they have been understood. 

Ibid. p. 116. 

It is a strange blind story this of the last three 
books, and of Hooker's live relict, the Beast without 
Beauty. But Saravia? — If honest Isaacs account 
of the tender, confidential, even confessional, friend- 
ship of Hooker and Saravia be accurate, how chanced 
it that Hooker did not entrust the manuscripts to his 
friend who stood beside him in his last moments ? 
At all events, Saravia must have known whether they 
had or had not received the author's last hand. 
Why were not Mr. Charke and the other Canterbury 
parson called to account, or questioned at least as to 
the truth of Mrs. Joan's story? Verily, I cannot 
help suspecting that the doubt cast on the authen- 
ticity of the latter books by the high church party 
originated in their dislike of portions of the contents. 
— In short, it is a blind story, a true Canterbury tale, 
dear Isaac ! * 

* Bat see Mr. Keble's statement (Pref. xzix.), and the argument 
founded on discoveries and collation of MSS. since the note in the text 
was -written^— Ed. 



iV«/. c.iii.7.p. 182. 

The next thing hereunto is, to impute all faults and 
corruptions, wherewith the world aboundeth, unto the kind 
of ecclesiastical goyemment established. 

How readily would this, and indeed all the dis- 
putes respecting the powers and constitution of 
Church government have been settled, or perhaps 
prevented, had there been an insight into the distinct 
nature and origin of the National Church and the 
Church under Christ ! * To the ignorance of this, 
all the fierce contentions hetween the Puritans and 
the Episcopalians under Ehzabeth and the Stuarts, 
all the errors and exorbitant pretensions of the 
Church of Scotland, and the heats and antipathies 
of our present Dissenters, may be demonstrably 

Ilnd, 9. p. 183. 

Pythagoras, by bringing up his scholars in the speculative 
knowledge of numbers, made their conceits therein so strong, 
that when they came to the contemplation of things natural, 
they imagined that in every particular thing they even beheld 
as it were with their eyes, how the elements of number gave 
essence and being to the works of nature : a thing in reason 
impossible; which notwithstanding, through their mis- 
fashioned pre-conceit, appeared unto them no less certain, 
than if nature had written it in the very foreheads of all the 
creatures of God. 

I am not so conversant with the volumes of Duns 
Scotus as to be able to pronounce positively whether 
he is an exception, but I can think of no other 

* See Mr. Coleridge's work On the Constitution of the Church and 
State according to the idea of each.'— iSi 


instance of high metaphysical genius in an English- 
man. Judgment, solid sense, invention in specialities, 
fortunate anticipations and instructive foretact of 
truth, — in these we can shew giants. It is evident 
from this example from the Pythagorean school that 
not even our incomparahle Hooker could raise him- 
self to the idea, so rich in truth, which is contained 
in the words numero^ 'ponder e, et mensura generantur 
ccbU et terra, 0, that Hooker had ever asked him- 
self concerning will, absolute will, — 6 apiOyJos 
virepapCdfjiLos, numerus omnes numeros poneyis, nun,' 
quam positus ! * 

Ibid. p. 183. 

When they of the * Family of Love * have it once in their 
heads, that Christ doth not signify any one person^ but a 
quality whereof many are partakers, &c. 

If the Familists thought of Christ as a quality, it 
was a grievous error indeed. But I have my doubts 
whether this was not rather an inference drawn bv 
their persecutors. 

Md. 15. p. 191. 

When instruction doth them no good, let them feel but 
the least degree of most mercifully-tempered severity, they 
fasten on the head of the Lord's vicegerents here on earth, 
whatsoever they any where find uttered against the cruelty 
of blood-thirsty men, and to themselves they draw all the 
sentences which Scripture hath in favor of innocency 
persecuted for the truth. 

How great the influence of the age on the strongest 
minds, when so eminently wise a man as Eichard 
Hooker could overlook the obvious impolicy of inflict^ 
ing punishments which the sufferer himself will 

* See F. P. I. ii. 8. p. 232.— Ed. 

HOOKE&, 5 

regard as merits, and all who have any need to be 
deterred will extol as martyrdom ! Even where the 
necessity could be plausibly pretended, it is war, not 
punitive law; — and then Augustine's argument for 

Ibid, c. iv. 1. p. 194. 

We require you to find out but one church upon the face 
.of the whole earth, that hath been ordered by your discipline, 
or hath not been ordered by ours, that is to say, by episcopal 
regiment, sithence the time that the blessed apostles were 
liere conversant. 

Hooker was so good a man that it would be wicked 
to suspect him of knowingly playing the sophist. 
And yet strange it is, that he should not have been 
aware that it was prelaxjy, not primitive episcopacy, 
the thing, not the name, that the reformers contended 
against, and, if the Catholic Church and the national 
Clerisy were (as both parties unhappily took for 
granted) one and the same, contended against with 
good reason. Knox's ecclesiastical polity (worthy of 
Lycurgus), adopted bishops under a different name, 
or rather under a translation instead of corruption 
of the name Mo-kottoi, He would have had super- 

/6id. c. V.2. p. 204. 

A law is the deed of the whole body politic, whereof if ye 
judge yourselves to be any part, then is the law even your 
deed also. 

This is a fiction of law for the purpose of giving to 
that, which is necessarily empirical, the form and 
consequence of a science, to the reality of which a 
code of laws can only approximate by compressing 
all liberty and individuality into a despotism. As 


Justinian to Alfred, and Constantinople, the Consuls 
and Senate of Rome to the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, 
and Common Council of London ; so is the imperial 
Eoman code to the common and statute law of Eng- 
land. The advocates of the discipline would, accord- 
ing to our present notions of civil rights, have been 
justified in putting fact against fiction, and might 
have challenged Hooker to shew, first, that the con- 
stitution of the Church in Christ was a congruous 
subject of parliamentary legislation ; that the legis- 
lators were bona fide determined by spiritual views, 
and that the jealousy and arbitrary principles of the 
Queen, aided by motives of worldly state policy, — for 
example, the desire of conciliating the Eoman 
Catholic potentates by retaining all she could of the 
exterior of the Eomish Church, its hierarchy, its 
ornaments, and its ceremonies, — were not the sub- 
stitutes for the Holy Spirit in influencing the majori- 
ties in the two Houses of Parliament. It is my own 
belief that the Puritans and the Prelatists divided 
the truth between them; and, as half truths are whole 
errors, were both equally in the wrong ; — the Pre- 
latists in contending for that as incident to the 
Church in Christ, that is, the collective number rGiv 
iKKaXoviJiiv(jDV, or ecclesia, which only belonged, but 
which rightfully did belong, to the National Church 
as a component estate of the realm, the enclesia; — 
the Puritans in requiring of the enclesia what was 
only requisite or possible for the ecclesia.^' Arch- 
bishop Grindal is an illustrious exception. He saw 
the whole truth, and that the functions of the encle- 
siastic and those of the ecclesiastic were not the less 
distinct, because both were capable of being exercised 
by the same person ; and vice versa, not the less 

* See the 'Church and State,' in which the ecclesiaf or Church in 
Christ, is dlBtingnished from the eneleaia, or national Church.— £i. 


compatible in the same subject because distinct in 
tbemselves. The Lord Chief Justice of the King's 
Bench is a Fellow of the Royal Society. 

Ibid, c VL 3. p. 209. 

Gk>d was not ignorant, that the priests and judges, whose 
sentence in matters of controversy he ordained should stand, 
both might and oftentimes would be deceived in their judg- 
ment. However, better it was in the eye of His understanding, 
that sometime an erroneous sentence definitive should 
prevail, till the same authority perceiving such oversight, 
might afterwards correct or reverse it, than that strifes 
should have respite to grow, and not come speedily to some 

It is difficult to say, which most shines through 
this whole passage, the spirit of wisdom or the spirit 
of meekness. The fatal error of the Romish Church 
did not consist in the inappellability of the Councils, 
or that an acquiescence in their decisions and decree 
was a duty binding on the conscience of the dissen- 
tients, — not I say in contending for a practical 
infallibility of Council or Pope ; but in laying claim 
to an actual and absolute immunity from error, and 
consequently for the unrepealability of their decisions 
by any succeeding Council or Pope. Hence, even 
wise decisions — wise under the particular circum- 
stances and times — degenerated into mischievous 
follies, by having the privilege of immortality without 
any' exemption from the dotage of superannuation. 
Hence errors became like glaciers, or ice-bergs in the 
frozen ocean nnthawed by summer, and growing from 
the fresh deposits of each returning winter. 

IhicL 6. p. 212. 

An argument necessary and demonstrative is such, as 
being proposed unto any man, and understood, the ismid 

8 . HOOKER. 

cannot ohoose but inwardly assent. Any one such reason 
dischargeth, I grant, the conscience, and setteth it at full 

I would not concede even so much as this. It 
may well chance that even an argument demonstra- 
tive, if understood, may be adducible against some 
one sentence of a whole liturgy ; and yet the means 
of removing it without a palpable overbalance of evil 
may not exist for a time; and either there is no 
command against schism, or we are bound in such 
small matters to offer the sacrifice of willing silence 
to the public peace of the Church. This would 
not, however, prevent a minister from pointing out 
the defect, in his character as a doctor or learned 

Ibid, c. viii. 1. p. 220. 

For adventuring to erect the discipline of Christ without 
the leave of the Christian magistrate, haply ye may condemn 
us as fools, in that we hazard thereby our estates and persons 
further than you which are that way more wise think neces- 
sary : but of any offence or sin therein committed against 
G^d, with what conscience can you accuse us, when your 
own positions are, that the things we observe should every 
of them be dearer unto us than ten thousand lives ,* that 
they are the peremptory commandments of God ,* that no 
mortal man can dispense with them, and that the magistrate 
greivously sinneth in not constraining thereimto 1 

Hoc argumentum ad invidiam nimis sycophanticum 
est quam ut mihi placeat a tanto viro. Besides, it 
contradicts Hooker's own very judicious rule, that to 
discuss and represent is the office of the learned, as 
individuals, because the truth may be entire in any 
one mind ; but to do belongs to the supreme power 
as the will of the whole body politic, and in effective 
action individuals are mere fractions without any 


legitimate referee to add them together. Hooker*s 
objection from the nobility and gentry of the realm 
is unanswerable, and within half a century afterwards 
proved insannountable. Imagine a sun containing 
within its proper atmosphere a multitude of transpa- 
rent satellites, lost in the glory, or all joining to form 
the yisible pham or disk ; and then beyond the 
precincts of this sun a number of opaque bodies at 
various distances, and having a common center of 
their own round which they revolve, and each more 
or less according to the lesser or greater distance 
partaking of the light and natural warmth of the 
sun, which I have been supposing ; but not sharing 
in its peculiar influences, or in the solar life sustain- 
able only by the vital air of the solar atmosphere. 
The opake bodies constitute the national churches, 
the sun the churches spiritual. The defect of the 
simile, arising necessarily out of the incompossibility 
of spiritual prerogatives with material bodies under 
the proprieties and necessities of space, is, that it 
does not, as no concrete or visual image can, repre- 
sent the possible duplicity of the individuals, the 
aggregate of whom constitutes the national church, 
so that any one individual, or any number of such 
individuals, may at the same time be, by an act of 
their own, members of the church spiritual, and in 
every congregation may form an ecclesia or Christian 
community; and how to facilitate and favor this 
without any schism from the enclesia, and without 
any disturbance of the body politic, was the problem 
which Grindal and the bishops of the first generation 
of the Reformed Church sought to solve, and it is the 
problem which every earnest Christian endued with 
competent gifts, and who is at the same time a patriot 
and a philanthropist, ought to propose to himself, as 
the ingens desiderium proborum. — 8th Sept. 1826. 


Ibid, c. viiL 7. p. 232. 

Baptizing of infants, although confessed by themselves, to 
have been continued ever sithence the very apostles* own 
times, yet they altogether condemned. 

QucBre, I cannot say what the fanatic Anabaptists, 
of whom Hooker is speaking, may have admitted ; 
bat the more sober and learned AntipsBdobaptists, 
who differed in this point only from the reformed 
churches, have all, I believe, denied the practice of 
infant baptism during the first century. 

B. I. c. ii. 1. p. 249. 

That which doth assign unto each thing the kind, that 
which doth moderate the force and power, that which doth 
appoint the form and measure^ of working, the same we 
term a law. 

See the Essays on method, in the Friend.* Hooker's 
words literally and grammatically interpreted seem to 
assert the antecedence of the thing to its kind, that 
is, to its essential characters ; — and to its force 
together with its form and measure of working, that 
is, to its specific and distinctive characters ; in short, 
the words assert the pre-existence of the thing to all 
its constituent powers, qualities, and properties. Now 
this is either — ^first, equivalent to the assertion of a 
prima et nuda materia, so happily ridiculed by the 
author of Hudibras,t and which under any scheme of 
cosmogony is a mere phantom, having its whole and 
sole substance in an impotent effort of the imagination 
or sensuous fancy, but which is utterly precluded by 
the doctrine of creation which it in like manner 
negatives: — or secondly, the words assert a self- 

• See the Essays generally from the fourth to the ninth, both inclu- 
Biyely, in VoL III. 8rd edition, more especially, the fifth Essay.— £i. 
t Part I. c. i. w. 161— 6.— Ja. 

HOOKER. 1 1 

destroying absurdity, namely, the antecedence of a 
thing to itself; as if having asserted that water 
consisted of hydrogen =i 77, and oxygen = 23, I 
should talk of water as existing before the creation of 
hydrogen and oxygen. All laws, indeed, are con- 
stitutive; and it would require a longer train of 
argument than a note can contain, to shew what a 
thing is ; but this at least is quite certain, that in 
the order of thought it must be posterior to the law 
that constitutes it. But such in fact was Hooker*s 
meaning, and the word, thing, is used proleptice in 
favour of the imagination, as appears from the sen- 
tences that follow, in which the creative idea is 
declared to be the law of the things thereby created. 
A productive idea, manifesting itself and its reality in 
the product is a law; and when the product is 
phs&nomenal, (that is, an object of the outward 
senses) it is a law of nature. The law is res nou- 
menon; the thing is res phaiwmenon,* A physical 
law, in the right sense of the term, is the sufficient 
cause of the appearance, — caiisa auh-faciens, 

P.S. What a deeply interesting volume might 
be written on the symbolic import of the primary 
relations and dimensions of space — ^long, broad, deep, 
or depth; surface'; upper, under, above and below, 
right, left, horizontal, perpendicular, oblique : — and 
then the order of causation, or that which gives 
intelligibility, and the reverse order of effects, or 
that which gives the conditions of actual existence ! 
Without the higher the lower would want its in- 
telligibility : without the lower the higher could not 
have existed. The infant is a riddle of which the 
man is the solution ; but the man could not exist but 
with the infant as his antecedent. 

* See the Essay on the idea of the Prometheus of .^schylus. Literary 
Bemains, Vol. II. p. 323.— Jtf, 


Ibid. 2. p. 250. 

In which essential Unity of Qod, a Trinity personal never- 
theless subsisteth, after a manner &r exceeding the possibility 
of man's conceit. 

If * conceit ' here means conception, the remark is 
most true ; for the Trinity is an idea, and no idea 
can be rendered by a conception. An idea is essen- 
tially inconceivable. But if it be meant that the 
Trinity is otherwise inconceivable than as the divine 
eternity and every attribute of God is and must be, 
then neither the commonness of the language here 
used, nor the high authority of the user, can deter 
me from denouncing it as untrue and dangerous. So 
far is it from being true, that on the contrary, the 
Trinity is the only form in which an idea of God is 
possible, unless indeed it be a Spinozistic or World- 

Ibid, c. iv. 1. p. 264. 

But now that we may lift up our eyes (as it were) from the 
footstool to the throne of God, and leaving these natural, 
consider a little the state of heavenly and divine, creatures : 
touching angels which are spirits immaterial and intellec- 
tual, &c. 

All this disquisition on the angels confirms my 
remark that our admirable Hooker was a giant of 
the race Aristotle versus Plato. Hooker was truly 
judicious, — ^the consummate synthesis of understanding 
and sense. An ample and most ordonnant concept 
tionist, to the tranquil empyrean of ideas he had not 
ascended. Of the passages cited from Scripture 
how few would bear a strict scrutiny ; being either, 
1. divine appearances, Jehovah in human form; 
or 2. the imagery of visions and all symbolic ; 
or 3. names of honor given to prophets, apostles, 


or bishops ; or lastly, mere accommodations to popular 
notious ! 

lUd. 3. p. 267. 

Since their fall, their practices have been the clean con- 
trary unto those before mentioned. For being dispersed, 
some in the air, some on the earth, some in the water, some 
among the minerals, dens, and caves, that are under the 
earth ; they have, by all means, laboured to effect a imiversal 
rebellion against the laws, and as far as in them lieth, utter 
destruction of the works of God. 

Childish ; but the childishness of the age, without 
which neither Hooker nor Luther could have acted 
on their contemporaries with the intense and benefi- 
cent energy wiUi which, they (God be praised I) 
did act. 

Ibid. p. 268. 

Thus much therefore may suffice for angels, the next unto 
whom in degree are men. 

St. Augustine well remarks that only three distinct 
genera of living beings are conceivable: — 1. the 
infinite rational ; 2. the finite rational : 3. the finite 
irrational : that is, God, man, brute animal. Ergo, 
angels can only be men with wings on their shoulders. 
Were our bodies transparent to our souls, we should 
be angels. 

Ibid. 0. X. 4. p. 303. 

It is no improbable opinion therefore which the arch- 
philosopher was of. 

There are, and can be, only two schools of philo- 
sophy, dififering in kind and in source. Dififerences 
in degree and in accident, there may be many ; but 
these constitute schools kept by different teachers 
with different degrees of genius, talent, and learning ; 

14 HOOKEfi. 

— ^auditories of philosophizers, not different philoso- 
phies. Schools of psilology (the love of empty noise) 
and misosophy are here out of the question. Schools 
of real philosophy there are but two, — best named by 
the arch-philosopher of each, namely, Plato and Aris- 
totle. Every man capable of philosophy at all (and 
there are not many such) is a bom Platonist or a 
bom Aristotelian.* Hooker, as may be discerned 
from the epithet of arch-philosopher applied to the 
Stagyrite, sensu monarchicOy was of the latter family, 
— ^a comprehensive, vigorous, discreet, and discretive 
conceptualist, but not an ideist. 

Ibid, 8. p. 308. 

Of this pomt therefore we are to note, that sith men 
naturally have no free and perfect power to command whole 
politic multitudes of men, therefore utterly without our 
consent, we could in such sort be at no man's commandment 
living. And to be commanded we do consent, when that 
society whereof we are part hath at any time before consented, 
without revoking the same after by the like universal 
agreement. Wherefore as any man's deed past is good as 
long as himself continueth ; so the act of a public society of 
men done five hundred years sithence standeth as theirs who 
presently are of the same societies, because corporations are 
immortal ; we were then alive in our predecessors, and they 

• 'Every man is bom an Aristotelian, or a Platonist. I do not 
think it possible that any one bom an Aristotelian can become a 
Platonist; and I am sure no bom Platonist can ever change into an 
Aristotelian. They are the two classes of men, beside which it is next 
to impossible to conceive a third. The one considers reason a quality, 
or attribute; the other considers it a i)ower. I believe that Aristotle 
never could get to understand what Plato meant by an idea. * * ♦ ♦ » 
Aristotle was, and still is, the sovereign lord of the understanding ; the 
faculty judging by the senses. He was a conceptualist, and never could 
raise himself into that higher state, which was natural to Plato, and has 
been so to others, in which the understanding is distinctly contemplated, 
and, as it were, looked down upon, from the throne of actual ideas, or 
living, inborn, essential tnxihBJ—TdUe Talkf 2nd Edit. p. 96.— Ed. 

HOOKER. 1 5 

in their successors do live still. Laws therefore human, of 
what kind soever, are available by consent. 

No nobler or clearer example than this could be 
given of what an idea is as contra- distinguished from 
a conception of the understanding, correspondent to 
Bome fact or facts, quorum notCB communes concapu 
untur, — ^the common characters of which are taken 
together under one distinct exponent, hence named a 
conception; and conceptions are internal subjective 
words. Eeflect on an original social contract, as an 
event or historical fSact ; and its gross improbability, 
not to say impossibility, will stare you in the face. 
But an ever-originating social contract as an idea, 
which exists and works continually and efficaciously 
in the moral being of every free citizen, though in the 
greater number unconsciously, or with a dim and con- 
fused consciousness, — what a power it is ! * As the 
vital power compared with the mechanic ; as a father 
compared with a moulder in wax or clay, such is the 
power of ideas compared with the influence of con- 
ceptions and notions. 

Ibid, 15. p. 316. 

1 nothing doubt but that Christian men should much 

better frame themselves to those heavenly precepts, which 
our Lord and Saviour with so great instancy gave us con- 
cerning peace and unity, if we did all concur in desire to have 
the use of ancient Councils again renewed, rather than these 
proceedings continued, which either make all contentions 
endless, or bring them to one only determination, and that 
of all other the worst, which is by sword. 

This is indeed a subject that deserves a serious 
consideration : and it may be said in favour of Hooker's 
proposal, namely, that the use of ancient Councils be 

* See the " Cbnrcb and State," c. i.~£d. 


renewed, that a deep and universal sense of the ahuse 
of Councils progressively from the Nicene to that of 
Trent, and our knowledge of the causes, occasions, 
and mode of such abuse, are so far presumptive for 
its non-recurrency as to render it less probable that 
honest men will pervert them from ignorance, and 
more difficult for unprincipled men to do so design- 
edly. Something too must be allowed for an honour- 
able ambition on the part of the persons so assembled, 
to disappoint the general expectation, and win for 
themselves the unique title of the honest Council. 
But still comes the argument, the blow of which I 
might more easily blunt than parry, that if Roman 
Catholic and Protestant, or even Protestant Episco- 
palian and Protestant Presbyterian divines were gene- 
rally wise and charitable enough to form a Christian 
General Council, there would be no need of one. 

N.B. The reasoning in this note, as far as it is in 
discouragement of a recurrence to general Councils, 
does not, me saltern jvdice, conclude 6igainst the 
suffering our Convocation to meet. The virtual abro- 
gation of this branch of our constitution I have long 
regarded as one of three or four Whig patriotisms, 
that have succeeded in de-anglicizing the mind of 

Ibid, c XL 4. p. 323. 

So that nature even in this life doth plainly claim and call 
for a more divine perfection than either of these two that 
have been mentioned. 

Whenever I meet with an ambiguous or multivocal 
word, without its meaning being shown and fixed, I 
stand on my guard against a sophism. I dislike this 
term * nature' in this place. If it mean the light that 
lighteth every man that com£th into the world, it is 


an inapt term ; for reason is supernatural. Now that 
reason in man must have been first actuated by a 
direct revelation from God, I have myself proved, 
and do not therefore deny that faith as the means of 
salvation was first made known by revelation ; but 
that reason is incapable of seeing into the fitness and 
superiority of these means, or that it is a mystery in 
any other sense than as all spiritual truths are mys- 
terious, I do deny, and deem it both a false and a 
dangerous doctrine. — 15 Sept. 1826. 

lUd. 6. p. 827. 

Concerning that faith^ hope, and charity, without which 
there can be no salvation ; was there ever any mention made 
saving only in that law which God himself hath from heaven 
revealed 1 There is not in the world a syllable muttered 
with certain truth concerning any of these three, more than 
hath been supematurally received from the mouth of the 
eternal God. 

That reason could have discovered these divine 
truths is one thing ; that when discovered by revela- 
tion, it is capable of apprehending the beauty and 
excellence of the things revealed is another. I may 
believe the latter, while I utterly reject the former. 
That all these cognitions, together with the fealty or 
faithfulness in the will whereby the mind of the flesh 
is brought under captivity to the mind of the spirit 
(the sensuous understanding to the reason) are super- 
natural, I not only freely grant, but fervently contend. 
But why the very perfection of reason, namely, those 
ideas or truth-powers, in which both the spiritual light 
and the spiritual life are co-inherent and one, should 
be called super-rational, I do not see. For reason is 
practical as well as theoretical; or even though I 

should exclude the practical reason, and confine the 
vou I. c 


term reason to the highest intellective power, — still I 
should think it more correct to describe the mysteries 
of faith as plusqiuim rationalia than super-rational. 
But the assertions that provoke the remark arose for 
the greater part, and still arise, out of the confound- 
ing of the reason with the understanding. In Hooker,'^ 
and the great divines of his age, it was merely an occa- 
sional carelessness in the use of the terms that reason 
is ever put where they meant the understanding ; for, 
from other parts of their writings, it is evident that 
they knew and asserted the distinction, nay, the diver- 
sity of the things themselves ; to wit, that there was 
in man another and higher light than that of the 
faculty judging according to sense, that is our under- 
standings. But, alas ! since the Eevolution, it has 
ceased to be a mere error of language, and in too j 
many it now amounts to a denial of reason ! *^ 

B. ii. c. V. 3. p. 379. 

To urge any thing as part of that supernatural and celes- 
tially revealed truth which God hath taught, and not to show 
it in Scripture ; this did the ancient Fathers evermore think 
unlawful, impious, execrable. 

Even this must be received cum grano sails. To 
be sure, with the licenses of interpretation, which the 
Fathers of the first three or four centuries allowed 
themselves, and with the arcana of evolution by word, 
letter, allegory, yea, punning, which they applied to 
detached sentences or single phrases of Holy Writ, 
it would not be easy to imagine a position which they 
could not * show in Scripture.* Let this be elucidated 
by the texts even now cited by the Romish priests 
for the truth of purgatory, indulgence, image- worship, 
invocation of dead men, and the like. The assertion 
therefore must be thus qualified. The ancient Fathers 


anathematised any doctrine not consentaneous with 
Scripture and deducible from it, either pari ratione 
or by consequence ; as when Scripture clearly com- 
mands an end, but leaves the means to be determined 
according to the circumstances, as for example, the 
frequent assembly of Christians. The appointment 
of a Sunday or Lord's day is evidently the fittest and 
most effectual mean to this end ; but yet it was not 
practicable, that is the mean did not exist, till the 
Boman government became Christian. But as soon 
as this event took place, the duty of keeping the 
Sunday holy is truly, though implicitly, contained in 
the Apostolic text. 

Ibid. vL 3. p. 392. 

Again, with a negative argument, David is pressed con- 
cerning the purpose he had to build a temple unto the Lord : 
Thtts aaith the Lordf Thou ahaU not build me a hotue to dwell 
in. Wheresoever I have walked with aXl Israel, spake I one 
word to any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to feed 
my people, sayvng. Why have ye not buiU me a house f 

The wisdom of the divine goodness both in the 
negative, the not having authorised any of the pre- 
ceding Judges from Moses downwards to build a 
temple — and in the positive, in having commanded 
David to prepare for it, and Solomon to build it — I 
have not seen put in the full light in which it so well 
deserves to be. The former or negative, or the evils 
of a splendid temple-worship, and its effects on the 
character of the priesthood, — evils, when not changed 
to good by hecoming the antidote and preventive of 
far greater evils, — would require much thought both 
to set forth and to comprehend. But to give any 
reflecting reader a sense of the providential foresight 

evinced in the latter, and this foresight beyond the 



reach of any but the Omniscient, it will be only 
necessary to remind him of the separation of the ten 
tribes and the breaking up of the realm into the two 
kingdoms of Judah and Israel in the very next reign. 
Without the continuity of succession provided for by 
this vast and splendid temple, built and arranged 
under the divine sanction attested by miracles — what 
criterion would there have existed for the purity of 
this law and worship ? what security for the preserv- 
ation and incorruption of the inspired writings ? 

IMd. vii 3. p. 403. 

That there is a city of Rome, that Pius Quintus and 
Gregory the Thirteenth, and others, have been Popes of 
Borne, I suppose we are certainly enough persuaded. The 
ground of our persuasion, who never saw the place nor 
persons before named, can be nothing but man's testimony. 
Will any man here notwithstanding allege those mentioned 
human infirmities as reasons why these things should be 
mistrusted or doubted of] Yea, that which is more, utterly 
to infringe the force and strength of man's testimony, were 
to shake the very fortress of God's truth. 

In a note on a passage in Skelton's Deism Re- 
vealed,* I have detected the subtle sophism that 
lurks in this argument, as applied by later divines in 
vindication of proof by testimony, in relation to the 
miracles of the Old and New Testament. As thus 
applied, it is a /merajQacrts els oAAo yivos, though 
so unobvious, that a very acute and candid reasoner 
might use the argument without suspecting the para- 
logism. It is not testimony, as testimony, that neces- 
sitates us to conclude that there is such a city as 
Rome, but a reasoning, that forms a branch of mathe- 
matical science. So far is our conviction from being 

• See post. Vol. ii.— ^. 

300KEB; 2 L 

grounded on our confidence in human testimony, that 
it proceeds on our knowledge of its fallible character, 
and therefore can find no sufficient reason for its 
coincidence on so vast a scale, but in the real exist- 
ence of the object. That a thousand lies told by as 
many several and unconnected individuals should 
all be one and the same, is a possibility expressible 
only by a fraction that is already, to all intents and 
purposes, equal to nought. 

B. iii. c. iii. 1. p. 447. 

The mixture of those things by speech, which by nature 
ore divided, is the mother of all error. 

• The division in thought of those things which in 
nature are distinct, yet one, that is, distinguished 
without breach of unity, is the mother,' — so I should 
have framed the position. Will, reason, life, — ideas 
in relation to the mind, are instances ; enticB indivlse 
interdistincta ; and the main arguments of the atheists, 
materialists, deniers of our Lord's divinity and the 
like, all rest on the asserting of division as a neces- 
sary consequence of distinction. 

R V. c. xix. 3. vol. ii. p. 87. 

Of both translations the better I willingly acknowledge 
that which cometh nearer to the very letter of the original 
verity; yet so that the other may likewise safely enough be 
read, without any peril at all of gainsaying as much as the 
least jot or syllable of Gk)d's most sacred and precious truth. 

Hooker had far better have rested on the impossi- 
bility, and the uselessness if possible, of a faultless 
translation ; and admitting certain mistakes and over- 
sights, have recommended them for notice at the next 
revision; and then asked, what objection such harmless 


trifles could be to a Church that never pretended 
to infallibility ! But in fact the age was not ripe 
enough even for a Hooker to feel, much less with 
safety to expose, the Protestants' idol, that is, their 

Ibid. c. xxii. 10. p. 125. 

Their only proper and direct proof of the thing in question 
had been to show, in what sort and how farman's salvation doth 
necessarily depend upon the knowledge of the word of God ; 
what conditions, properties, and qualities there are, whereby 
sermons are distinguished from other kinds of administering 
the word unto that purpose ; and what special property or 
quality that is, which being no where found but in sermons, 
maketh them effectual to save souls, and leaveth all other 
doctrinal means besides destitute of vital efficacy. 

(Doubtless, Hooker was a theological Talus, with a 
cluETof iron against opponents with pastebo«u:d helmets, 
and armed only with crabsticks r\ But yet, I too, too 
often find occasion to complain iSi him as abusing his 
superior strength. For in a good man it is an abuse of 
his intellectual superiority, not to use a portion of it in 
stating his Christian opponents' cause, his brethren's 
(though dissentient, and perhaps erring, yet still 
brethren's) side of the question, not as they had stated 
and argued it, but as he himself with his higher gifts 
of logic and foresight could have set it forth. |But 
Hooker flies off to the general, in which he is unas- 
sailable?) and does not, as in candour he should have 
done, inquire whether the question would not admit 
of, nay demand, a different answer, when applied 
solely or principally to the circumstances, the condi- 
tion and the needs of the English parishes, and the 
population at large, at the particular time when the 
Puritan divines wrote, and he. Hooker, replied to 
them. Now let the cause be tried in this way, and I 


should not be afraid to attempt the proof of the para- 
mount efficacy of preaching on the scheme, and in 
the line of argument laid down by himself in this 
section. In short, Hooker frequently finds it conve- 
nient to forget the homely proverb, * the proof of the 
pudding is in the eating.* Whose parishes were the 
best disciplined, whose flocks the best fed, the soberest 
livers, and the most awakened and best informed 
Christians, those of the zealous preaching divines, or 
those of the prelatic clergy with their readers ? In 
whose chiurches and parishes were all the other 
pastoral duties, catechising, visiting the poor and the 
like, most strictly practised? 

Ibid- p. 11. 

The people which have no way to come to the knowledge 
of God, no prophesying, no teaching, perish. But that they 
should of necessity perish, where any one way of knowledge 
lacketh, is more than the words of Solomon import 

But what was the fact ? Were those congregations 
that had those readers of whom the Puritans were 
speaking — were they, I say, equally well acquainted 
with, and practically impressed by, the saving truths 
of the Gospel ? Were they not, rather, perishing for 
lack of knowledge? To reply — it was their own 
fault ; they ought to have been more regular in their 
attendance at church, and more attentive, when there, 
to what was there read, — is to my mind too shocking, 
nay, antichristian. 

Ibid. 16. p. 137. 

Now all these things being well considered, it shall be no 
intricate matter for any man to judge with indifferency, on 
which part the good of the church is most conveniently 
sought ; whether on ours, whose opinion is such as hath been 


showed, or else on theirs, who leaving no ordinary way of 
salvation for them unto whom the word of God is but only 
read, do seldom name them but with great disdain and 
contempt, who execute that service in the church of Christ. 


If SO, they were much to be blamed. But surely 
this was not the case with the better and wiser part 
of those who, clinging to the tenets and feelings of 
the first Keformers, and honouring Archbishop 
Grindal as much as they dreaded his Arminian suc- 
cessors, were denominated Puritans ! They limited 
their censures to exclusive reading, — to reading as 
the substitute for, and too often for the purpose of 
doing away with, preaching. 

lhid» Ixv. 8. p. 416. 

Thus was the memory of that sign which they had in 
baptism a kind of bar or prevention to keep them even from 
apostasy, whereinto the frailty of flesh and blood, overmuch 
fearing t^ endure shame, might peradventure the more easily 
otherwise have drawn them. 

I begin to fear that Hooker is not suited to my 
nature. I cannot bear round-abouts for the purpose 
of evading the short cut straight before my eyes. 
Exempli gratia ; I find myself tempted in this place 
to ejaculate Psha! somewhat abruptly, and ask, 
How many in twenty millions of Christian men 
and women ever reverted to the make-believe im» 
pression of the Cross on their forehead in unconscious 
infancy, by the wetted tip of the clergyman's finger, 
as a preservative against anger and resentment? 
* The whole church of Godl' Was it not the same 
church which, neglecting and concealing the Scrip- 
tures of God, introduced the adoration. of the Cross, 
the worshipping of relics, holy water, and all the 
other countless mummeries of Popery ? Something 



might be pretended for the material images of the 
Cross worn at the bosom or hung up in the bed- 
chamber. These may, and doubtless often do, serve 
as silent monitors ; but this eye-falsehood or pretence 
of making a mark that is not made, is a gratuitous 
superstition, that cannot be practised without serious 
danger of leading the vulgar to regard it as a charm. 
Hooker should have asked — Has it hitherto had this 
effect on Christians generally ? Is it likely to pro- 
duce this effect and this principally? In common 
honesty he must have answered, No! — Do I then 
blame the Church of England for retaining this 
ceremony ? {%j no means. I justify it as a wise and 
pious condescension to the inveterate habits of a 
people newly dragged, rather than drawn, out of 
Papistry; and as a pledge that the founders and jiL 

fathers of the Reformation m England regarded ^^ 

innovation as per se an evil, and therefore requiring 
for itajustification not only a cause, but a weighty 
cause// They did well and piously in deferring the 
removal of minor spots and stains to the time when 
the good effects of the more important reforms had 
begun to show themselves in the minds and hearts of 
the laity. — But they do not act either wisely or 
charitably who would eulogise these maculcB as 
beauty-spots and vindicate as good what their pre- 
decessors only tolerated as the lesser evil. — liith 
Aug. 1826. 

Ibid, 16. p. 424. 

For in actions of this kind we are more to respect what 
the greatest part of men is commonly prone to conceive, than 
what some few men's wits may devise in construction of their 
own particular meanings. Plain it is, that a false opinion of 
some personal divine excellency to be in those things which 
either nature or art hath framed, caiiseth always religious 


How strongly might this most judicious remark be 

turned against Hooker's own mode of vindicating this 

ceremony ! 

lUd. IxvL 2. p. 432. 

The Church had received from Christ a promise that such 
as have believed in him, these signs and tokens should follow 
them. ' To cast out devils, to speak with tongues, to drive 
away serpents, to be free from the harm which any deadly 
poison could work, and to cure diseases by imposition of 
hands.' — Ma/rJc xvi 

The man who verily and sincerely believes the 
narrative in St. John's Gospel of the feeding of five 
thousand persons with a few loaves and small fishes, 
and of the raising of Lazarus, in the plain and literal 
sense, cannot be reasonably suspected of rejecting, or 
doubting, any narrative concerning Christ and his 
Apostles, simply as miraculous. I trust, therefore, 
that no disbelief of, or prejudice against, miraculous 
events and powers will be attributed to me, as the 
ground or cause of my strong persuasion that the 
latter verses of the last chapter of St. Mark's Gospel 
were an additament of a later age, for which St. 
Luke's Acts of the Apostles misunderstood supplied 
the hints. 

Ibid, Ixxii 16 & 16. p. 539. 

If Richard Hooker had written only these two 
precious paragraphs, I should hold myself bound to 
thank the Father of lights and Giver of all good gifts 
for his existence and the preservation of his writings. 

B. viiL c. ix. 2. voL iii. p. 537. 

As there oould be in natural bodies no motion of anything, 
unless there were some which moveth all things, and con- 
tinoeth immoveable ; even so in politic societies, there must 
be some unpanishable, or else no man shall suffer punishment. 


It is most painful to connect the venerable, almost 
sacred, name of Eichard Hooker with such a specimen 
of puerile sophistry, scarcely worthy of a court bishop s 
trencher chaplain in the slavering times of our Scotch 
Solomon. It is, however, of some value, some interest 
at least, as a striking example of the confusion of an 
idea with a conception. Every conception has its 
sole reality in its being referable to a thing or class 
of things, of which, or of the common characters of 
which, it is a reflection. An idea is a power, bvvaiiis 
voepd, which constitutes its own reality, and is in 
order of thought necessarily antecedent to the things 
in which it is more or less adequately realised, while 
a conception is as necessarily posterior. 


Vol. iii. p. 583. 

The following truly admirable discourse is, I think, 
the concluding .sermon of a series unhappily not 

Ibid. p. 584. 

If it were bo in matters of faith, then, as all men have equal 
certainty of this, so no believer should be more scrupulous 
and doubtful than another. But we find the contrary. The 
angels and spirits of the righteous in heaven have certainty 
most evident of things spiritual : but this they have by the 
light of glory. That which we see by the light of grace, 
though it be indeed more certain ; yet it is not to us so evi- 
dently certain, as that which sense or the light of nature will 
not suffer a man to doubt of. 

Hooker's meaning is right ; but he falls into a sad 
confusion of words, blending the thing and the relation 
of the mind to the thing. The fourth moon of Jupiter 


is certain in itself ; but evident only to the astronomer 
with his telescope. 

Ibid. pp. 686— -588. 

The other, which we call the certainty of adherence, is 
when the heart doth cleave and stick unto that which it doth 
believe. This certainty is greater in ns than the other. * * 
* * {dovm to) the fourth question resteth, and so an end of 
this point. 

These paragraphs should be written in gold. O I 
may these precious words be written on my heart ! 
1. That we all need to be redeemed, and that there- 
fore we are all in captivity to an evil : — 2. That 
there is a Redeemer : — 3. That the redemption re- 
latively to each individual captive is, if not effected 
under certain conditions, yet manifestable as far as is 
fitting for the soul by certain signs and consequents : 
— and 4. That these signs are in myself; that the 
conditions under which the redemption offered to all 
men is promised to the individual, are fulfilled in 
myself; — these are the four great points of faith, in 
which the humble Christian finds and feels a grada- 
tion from trembling hope to full assurance ; yet the 
will, the act of trust, is the same in all. Might I not 
almost say, that it rather increases with the decrease 
of the consciously discerned evidence? To assert 
that I have the same assurance of mind that I am 
saved as that I need a Saviour, would be a contra- 
diction to my own feelings, and yet I may have an 
equal, that is, an equivalent assurance. How is it 
possible that a sick man should have the same 
certainty of his convalescence as of his sickness ? 
Yet he may be assured of it. So again, my faith in 
the skill and integrity of my physician may be com- 
plete* but the application of it to my own case may 


be troubled by the sense of my own imperfect 
obedience to his prescriptions. The sort of our 
beliefs and assurances is necessarily modified by their 
different subjects. It argues no want of saving faith 
on the whole, that I cannot have the same trust in 
myself as I have in my God. That Christ's righteous- 
ness can save me, — that Christ's righteousness alone 
can save — these are simple positions, all the terms 
of which are steady and copresent to my mind. But 
that I shall be so saved, — that of the many called 
I have been one of the chosen, — this is no mere 
conclusion of mind on known or assured premisses. 
I can remember no other discourse that sinks into 
and draws up comfort from the depths of our being 
below our own distinct consciousness, with the clear- 
ness and godly loving-kindness of this truly evan- 
gelical God-to-be-thanked-for sermon. But how large, 
how important a part of our spiritual life goes on 
like the circulation, absorptions, and secretions of 
our bodily life, unrepresented by any specific sensa- 
tion, and yet the ground and condition of our total 
sense of existence I 

While I feel, acknowledge, and revere the almost 
measureless superiority of the sermons of the divines, 
who labored in the firat, and even the first two cen- 
turies of the Reformation, from Luther to Leighton, 
over the prudential morals and apologising theology 
that have characterised the unfanatical clergy since 
the Revolution in 1688, 1 cannot but regret, espe- 
cially while I am listening to a Hooker, that they 
vrithheld all light from the truths contained in the 
words • Satan,' • the Serpent,' * the Evil Spirit,' and 
this last used plurally. 



Ibid. 8. 31. pp. 659—661. 

But we say, our salvation is by Christ alone ; therefore 
howsoever, or whatsoever, we add unto Christ in the matter 
of salvation, we overthrow Christ. Our case were very hard, 
if this ai^gument, so universally meant as it is proposed, were 
sound and good. We ourselves do not teach Christ alone, 
excluding our own faith, unto justification; Christ alone, 
excluding our own work, imto sanctification ; Christ alone, 
excluding the one or the other as unnecessary imto salvation. 
***** Xq YfQ have received, so we teach that besides 
the bare and naked work, wherein Christ, without any other 
associate, finished all the parts of our redemption and 
piwchaaed salvation himself alone ; for conveyance of this 
eminent blessing imto us, many things are required, as, to 
be known and chosen of Qod before the foundations of 
the world ; m the world to be called, justified, sanctified ; 
after we have left the world to be received into glory ; 
Christ in every of these hath somewhat which he worketh 
alone, &c. &c. 

No where out of the Holy Scripture have I found 
the root and pith of Christian faith so clearly and 
purely propounded as in this section. God, whose 
thoughts are eternal, beholdeth the end, and in the 
completed work seeth and accepteth every stage of 
the process. I dislike only the word * purchased ; ' 
— not that it is not Scriptural, but because a meta- 
phor well and wisely used in the enforcement and 
varied elucidation of a truth, is not therefore properly 
employed in its exact enunciation. I will illustrate, 
amplify and divide the word with Paul ; but I mil 
propound it collectively with John. If in this 
admirable passage aught else dare be wished other- 
wise, it is the division and yet confusion of time and 
eternity, by giving an anteriority to the latter. 


I am persuaded, that the practice of the Homish 
church tendeth to make vain the doctrine of salvation 
hy faith in Christ alone ; but judging by her most 
eminent divines, I can find nothing dissonant from 
the truth in her express decisions on this article. 
Perhaps it would be safer to say : — Christ alone saves 
us, working in us by the faith which includes hope 
and love. 

Ibid. 8. 34. p. 671. 

If it were not a strong deluding spirit which hath posses- 
sion of' their hearts ; were it possible but that they should 
see how plainly they do herein gainsay the very groimd of 
apostolic faith? * * * The Apostle, as if he had foreseen 
how the Church of Rome would abuse the world in time by 
ambiguous terms, to declare in what sense the name of grace 
must be taken, when we make it the cause of our salvation, 
saith, ffe saved ils according to his mercy, &c. 

In all Christian communities there have been and 
ever will be too many Christians in name only ; — too 
many in belief and notion only: but likewise, I 
trust, in every acknowledged Church, Eastern or 
Western, Greek, Roman, Protestant, many of those 
in belief, more or less erroneous, who are Christians 
in faith and in spirit. And I neither do nor can 
think, that any pious member of the Church of Rome 
did ever in his heart attribute any merit to any 
v\rork as being his work.* A grievous error and a 

• But see the language of the Council of Trent : Si quia dizerit justi- 
tiam acceptam non conservari atque etiam augeri coram Deo per bona 
opera ; sed opera ipsa fructus solummodo et signa esse justificationis 
adeptae, non atUem ipaius augendce cauaam; anathema sit. Sess. YI. 
Can. 24. * * * Si quia dizerit hominis justificati bona opera ita esse 
dona Dei, ut non aint etiam bona ipsius justijicati merita; aut ipsnm justi- 
ficatum bonis operibuSf qusB ab eo per Dei gratiam, et Jesu Christi 
meritum, cujus vivum membrum est, fiunt, non vere mereri augmentum 
gratke, vUam cetemam, et ipsitis vitas astemce, si tamen in gratia deces- 
serit, eonseecutionem atque etiam glorice augmentum, anathema sit. lb. 
Can. 22.— Ed. 


mischievous error there was practically in mooting 
the question at all of the condignity of works and their 
rewards. In short, to attribute merit to any agent 
but God in Christ, our faith as Christians forbids us ; 
and to dispute about the merit of works abstracted 
from the agent, common sense ought to forbid us. 


Ibid. p. 698. 

I said directly and plainly to all men's understanding, that 
it was not indeed to be doubted, but many of the Fathers 
were saved ; but the means, said I, was not their ignorance, 
which excuseth no man with Gk)d, but their knowledge and 
faith of the truth, which, it appeareth, God vouchsafed them, 
by many notable monuments and records extant of it in all 

Not certainly, if the ignorance proceeded directly 
or indirectly from a defect or sinful propensity of 
the will ; but where no such cause is imaginable, in 
such cases this position of Master Travers is little 
less than blasphemous to the divine goodness, and in 
direct contradiction to an assertion of St. PauVs,*^ 
and to an evident consequence from our Saviour'a 
own words on the polygamy of the fathers.f 

Ibid. p. 719. 

The next thing discovered, is an opinion about the assurance 
of men's persuasion in matters of faith. I have taught, he 
saith, ' That the assurance of things which we beheve by the 
word, is not so certain as of that we perceive by sense.' 

A useful instance to illustrate the importance of 

• Bomi. 11. 12.— £2 t Matt. ziz. 8.— Ed. 

BOOKER, •(•) 

distinct, and the mischief of equivocal or multivocal, 
terms. Had Hooker said that the fundamental 
truths of religion, though perhaps even more certain, 
are less evident than the facts of sense, there could 
have heen no misunderstanding. Thus the demon- 
strations of algebra possess equal certainty with those 
of geometry, but cannot lay claim to the same evi- 
dence. Certainty is positive, evidence relative ; the 
former, strictly taken, insusceptible of more or less, 
the latter capable of existing in many different 

Writing a year or more after the preceding note, 1 
am sorry to say that Hooker*s reasoning on this 
point seems to me sophistical throughout. That a 
man must see what he sees is no persuasion at all, 
nor bears the remotest analogy to any judgment of 
the mind. The question is, whether men have a 
clearer conception and a more stedfast conviction of 
the objective reality to which the image moving their 
eye appertains, than of the objective reality of the 
things and states spiritually discovered by faith. And 
this Travers had a right to question wherever a 
saving faith existed. 

August, 1826. 

■ ♦ 


Ibid. p. 801. 
In spirit I am with you to the world's end. 

O how grateful should I be to be made intuitive 
of the truth intended in the words — In spirit I am 
with you! 

VOL. I. i> 


Ibid. p. 808. 

Touching tlie latter affection of fear, which respecteth evils 
to come, as the other which we have spoken of doth present 
evils ; first, in the nature thereof it is plain that we are not 
of every future evil afraid. Perceive we not how they, whose 
tenderness shrinketh at the least rase of a needle's point, do 
kiss the sword that pierceth their souls quite thorow ? 

In this and in sundry similar passages of this 
venerable writer there is ws ifioLye boKeX, a very 
plausible, but even therefore the more dangerous, 
sophism; but the due detection and exposure of 
which would exceed the scanty space of a marginal 
comment. Briefly, what does Hooker comprehend 
in the term * pain ? ' Whatsoever the soul finds 
adverse to her well being, or incompatible with her 
free action? In this sense Hooker's position is a 
mere truism. But if pain be applied exclusively to 
the soul finding itself as life, then it is an error. 

Ibid. p. 811. 

Fear then in itself being mere nature, cannot in itself he 
sin, which sin is not nature, but therefore an accessary 

I suspect a misprint, and that it should be depra- 
vation. But if not nature, then it must be a super- 
induced and incidental depravation of nature. The 
principal, namely fear, is nature ; but the sin, that is, 
that it is a sinful fear, is but an accessary. 



— •• — 

Fljf-kaf.—Haimah ScoOoek^ her hook^ February 10, 1787. 

This, Hannah Scollock ! may have been the case ; 
Your writing therefore I will not erase. 
But now this book, once yours, belongs to me, 
The Morning Post's and Courier's S. T. C. ;— 
Elsewhere in College, knowledge, wit and scholerage 
To Mends and public known, as S. T. Coleridge. 
Witness hereto my hand, on Ashly Qreen, 
One thousand, twice four hundred, and fourteen 
Year of our Lord — and of the month November, 
The fifteenth day, if right I do remember. 

tMT DEAR Derwent, 2^th March, 1819. 

This one volume, thoroughly understood and 
appropriated, will place you in the highest ranks of 
doctrinal Church of England divines (of such as now 
are), and in no mean rank as a true doctrinal Church 
historian. Next to this, I recommend Baxter's own 
Life, edited by Sylvester, with my marginal notes. 
Here, more than in any of the prelatical and Armi- 
nian divines from Laud to the death of Charles II., 
you will see the strength and beauty of the Church 
oi England, that is, its liturgy, homilies, and articles. 
By oontrasting, too, its present state with that which 
such excellent men as Baxter, Calamy, and the so- 
called Presbyterian or Puritan divines, would have 
made it, you will bless it as the bulwark of toleration. 

♦ FoUo 1628.—^. 
t The following letter was written on, and addressed vith, the book 
to the Ber. Derwent Colerid^.— £i. 


Thirdly, you must read Eichorn's Introduction to 
the Old and New Testament, and the Apocrypha, and 
his comment on the Apocalypse ; to all which my 
notes and your own previous studies will supply 
whatever antidote is wanting ; — these will sufl&ce for 
your Biblical learning, and teach you to attach no 
more than the supportable weight to these and such 
like outward evidences of our holy and spiritual 

So having done, you will be in point of profes- 
sional knowledge such a clergyman as will make glad 
the heart of your loving father, 

S. T. Coleridge. 

N.B. See Book IV. Chap, vii., p. 351, both for a 
masterly confutation of the Paleyo-Grotian evidences 
of the Gospel, and a decisive proof in what light that 
system was regarded by the Church of England in 
its best age. Like Grotius himself, it is half way 
between Popery and Socinianism. 

B. I, c. iii p. 5. 

But men desired only to be like unto God in oninisciencey 
and the general knowledge of all things which may be com- 
municated to a creature, as in Christ it is to his human souL 

Surely this is more than doubtful ; and even the 
instance given is irreconcilable with Christ's own 
assertion concerning the last day, which must be 
understood of his human soul, by all who hold the 
faith delivered from the foundation, namely, his deity. 
Field seems to have excerpted this incautiously from 
the Schoolmen, who on this premiss could justify the 
communicability of adoration, as in the case of the 
saints. Omniscience, it may be proved, implies omni- 
potence. The fourth of the arguments in this section, 
and, as closely connected with it, the first (only 



somewhat differently stated) seem the strongest, or 
rather the only ones. For the second is a mere anti- 
cipation of the fourth, and all that is true in the 
third is involved in it. 

Ibid, c. V. p. 9. 

And began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave 
them utterance. 

That is, I humbly apprehend, in other than the 
Hebrew and Syrochaldaic languages, which (with rare 
and reluctant exceptions in favour of the Greek) were 
appropriated to public prayer and exhortation, just as 
the Latin in the Romish Church. The new converts 
preached and prayed, each to his companions in his 
and their dialect ; — they were all Jews, but had assem- 
bled from all the different provinces of the Eoman 
and Parthian empires, as the Quakers among us to 
the yearly meeting in London ; this was a sign, not 
a miracle. The miracle consisted in the visible 
and audible descent of the Holy Ghost, and in the 
fulfilment of the prophecy of Joel, as explained 
by St. Peter himself. Acts ii. 15. 

Ibid. p. 10. 

Aliiid est etymologia nominis et aXiud significatio nominis. 
Etymologia attenditw secu/ndum id a quo imponitur nomen ad 
significomdvm : nominis vero significatio secu/ndum id ad quod 
significamdvm imponitwr. 

This passage from Aquinas would be an apt motto 
for a critique on Home Tooke's Diversions of Purley. 
The best service of etymology is, when the sense of 
a word is still unsettled, and especially when two 
words have each two meanings ; Az= a-b, and B =ia-b, 
instead of A=a and B=b. Thus reason and under- 
standing as at present popularly confounded. Here 


the etyma, — ratio, the relative proportion of thoughts 
and things, — and understanding, as the power which 
substantiates phcmomena (siibstat eis) — determine the 
proper sense. But most often the etyma being equi- 
valent, we must proceed exarbitrio, as 'law compels,' 
* religion obliges ;* or take up what had been begun 
in some one derivative. Thus * fanciful' and * imagi- 
native,' are discriminated; — and this supplies the 
ground of choice for giving to fancy and imagination 
each its own sense. Cowley is a fanciful writer, 
Milton an imaginative poet. Then I proceed with 
the distinction, how ill fancy assorts with imagination, 
as instanced in Milton's Limbo. * 


I should rather express the difference between the 
faithful of the Synagogue and those of the Church, 
thus : — That the former hoped generally by an implicit 
faith ; — " It shall in all things be well with all that 
love the Lord ; therefore it cannot but be good for us 
and well with us to rest with our forefathers." But 
the Christian hath an assured hope by an explicit and 
particular faith, a hope because its object is future, 
not because it is uncertain. The one was on the road 
journeying toward a friend of his father's, who had 
promised he would be kind to him even to the third 
and fourth generation. He comforts himself on the 
road, first, by means of the various places of refresh- 
ment, which that friend had built for travellers and 
continued to supply : and secondly, by anticipation of 
a kind reception at the friend's own mansion-house. 
But the other has received an express invitation to a 
banquet, beholds the preparations, and has only to 
wash and put on the proper robes, in order to sit 

• p. L. III. 487.—^. 


Jbid* p. 11. 

The reason why our traiiBlators, in the beginning, did 
choose rather to use the word ' congregation ' than ' Church/ 
was not, as the adversary maliciously imagineth, for that they 
feared the very name of the Church ; but because as by the 
name of religion and religious men, ordinarily in former 
times, men understood nothing but fcu^Uiaa religumu, as 
Gerson out of Anselme calleth them, that is, the professions 
of monks and friars, so, &c. 

For the same reason the word religion for OprjaKfCa 
in St. James * ought now to be altered to cere- 
mony or ritual. The whole version has by change 
of language become a dangerous mistranslation, and 
furnishes a favourite text to our moral preachers, 
Church Socinians and other christened pagans now so 
rife amongst us. What was the substance of the 
ceremonial law is but the ceremonial part of the 
Christian religion; but it is its solemn ceremonial 
law, and though not the same, yet one with it and 
inseparable, even as form and substance. Such is St. 
Jameses doctrine, destroying at one blow Antinomi- 
anism and the Popish popular doctrine of good works. 

Ibid, 0. xviii. p. 27< 

But if the Church of God remains in Corinth, where there 
were divisions, sects, ernvXations, &c. * * * who dare deny 
those societies to be the Churches of God, wherein the tenth 
part of these horrible evils and abuses is not to be found ] 

It is rare to meet with sophistry in this sound 
divine ; but here he seems to border on it. For first 
the Corinthian Church upon admonition repented of 
its negligence; and secondly, the objection of the 
Puritans was, that the constitution of the Church 
precluded discipline. 

* i. 27. See Aids to ReflectioD. 3rd edit. p. 17. n.^Ed. 


B. II. C. 11. p. 31. 

' Miscreant' is twice used in this page in its original 
sense of misbeliever. 

Ibid. c. iv. p. 35. • 

* Discourse' is here used for the discursive acts of 
the understanding, even as * discursive' is opposed to 
* intuitive' by Milton* and others. Thus understand 
Shakspeare's " discourse of reason" for those discur- 
sions of mind which are peculiar to rational beings. 

£. III. 0. 1. p. 53. 

The first publishers of the Gbspel of Christ delivered a 
rule of faith to the Christian Churches which they founded, 
comprehending all those articles that are found in that 
epitome of Christian religion, which we call the Apostles' 

This needs proof. I rather believe that the so- 
called Apostles' Creed was really the Creed of the 
Roman or Western Church (and possibly in its present 
form, the catechismal rather than the baptismal 
Creed), — and that other Churches in the East had 
Creeds equally ancient, and, from their being earlier 
troubled with Anti-Trinitarian heresies, more express 
on the divinity of Christ than the Roman. 

Ibid. p. 58. 

Fourthly, that it is no less absurd to say, aa the Papists do, 
that our satisfaction is required as a condition, without which 
Christ's satisfaction is not appliable unto us, tiian to say, 
Peter hath paid the deht of John, and he to whom it was due 
accepteth of the same payment^ conditionally if he pay it 
himself also. 

w hence the soul 
Reason receives, and reason is her being, 
Discorsive or intuitive. P. L. v. 426.— £U. 


♦ This propriation of a metaphor, namely, forgiveness 
of sin, and abolition of goilt through the redemptive 
power of Christ's love and of his perfect obedience 
during his voluntary assumption of humanity, ex- 
pressed, on account of the sameness of the conse- 
quences in both cases, by the payment of a debt for 
another, which debt the payer had not himself incurred, 
— the propriation of this, I say, by transferring the 
sameness from the consequents to the antecedents, is 
the one point of orthodoxy (so called, I mean) in 
which I still remain at issue. It seems to me so 
evidently a fxerajSaony ek fiAAo yivos. A metaphor 
is an illustration of something less known by a more 
or less partial identification of it with something better 
understood. Thus St. Paul illustrates the conse- 
quences of the act of redemption by four different 
metaphors drawn from things most familiar to those 
for whom it was to be illustrated, namely, sin-offerings, 
or sacrificial expiation ; reconciliation ; ransom from 
slavery; satisfaction of a just creditor by vicarious 
payment of the debt. These all refer to the conse- 
quences of redemption. Now, St. John without any 
metaphor declares the mode by and in which it is 
efifected ; for he identifies it with a fact, not with a 
consequence, and a fact, too, not better understood in 
the one case than in the other, namely, by generation 
and birth. There remains, therefore, only the 
redemptive act itself, and this is transcendant, inef- 
fable, and a fortiori, therefore, inexplicable. Like 
the act of primal apostacy, it is in its own nature a 
mystery, known only through faith in the spirit. 
James owes John £100, which (to prevent James's 
being sent to prison) Henry pays for him ; and John 
has no longer any claim. But James is cruel and 

• The reader of the Aids to Reflection will recognise in this note the 
rough original of the passages p. 313, &c. of the 3rd edition of that 
work.— Ja. 


ungrateful to Mary, his tender mother. Heniy, 
though no relation, acts the part of a loving and 
dutiful son to Mary. But will this satisfy the mother's 
claims on James, or entitle him to her esteem, appro- 
bation, and blessing? If, indeed, by force of Henry's 
example or persuasion, or any more mysterious influ- 
ence, James repents, and becomes himself a good and 
dutiful child, then, indeed, Mary is wholly satisfied ; 
but then the case is no longer a question of debt in 
that sense in which it can be paid by another, though 
the effect, of which alone St. Paul was speaking, is 
the same in both cases to James as the debtor, and to 
James as the undutiful son. He is in both cases 
liberated from the burthen, and in both cases he has 
to attribute his exoneration to the act of another ; as 
cause simply in the payment of the debt, or as like- 
wise causa causes in James's reformation. Such is 
my present opinion : God grant me increase of light 
either to renounce or confirm it. 

Perhaps the different terms of the above position 
may be more clearly stated thus :- — 1. agens cattsator : 
2. actu^ causativus: 3. effectus causatus : 4. conse- 
quentia ah effecto, 1. The co-eternal Son of the 
living God, incarnate, tempted, crucified, resui'gent, 
communicant of his spirit, ascendant, and obtaining 
for his Church the descent of the Holy Ghost. 2. A 
spiritual and transcendant mystery. 3. The being 
bom anew, as before in the flesh to the world, so now 
in the spirit to Christ ; where the differences are, the 
spirit opposed to the flesh, and Christ to the world ; 
the punctum indifferenSy or combining term, remaining 
the same in both, namely, a birth. 4. Sanctification 
from sin and liberation from the consequences of sin, 
with all the means and process of sanctification, being 
the same for the sinner relatively to God and his own 
soul, as the satisfaction of a creditor for a debt, or as 


the offering of an atoning sacrifice for a transgressor 
of the law ; as a reconciliation for a rebellious son or 
a subject to his alienated parent or offended sove- 
reign ; and as a ransom is for a slave in a heavy cap- 
tivity. Now my complaint is that our systematic 
divines transfer the paragraph 4 to the paragraphs 2 
and 3, interpreting proprio sensu et ad totum what is 
afi&rmed sensu metaphorico et ad partem, that is, ad 
consequentia a regeneratione effecta per actum causor 
tivum primi agentis, nempe A6yov redemptoris, and by 
this interpretation substituting an identification abso- 
lute for an equation proportional.^-4th May, 1819. 

Ibid, p. 62. 
Personality is nothing but the existence of nature itself. 

God alone had his nature in himself; that is, God 
alone contains in himself the ground of his own 
existence. But were this definition of Field's right, 
we might predicate personality of a worm, or where- 
ever we find life. Better say, — personality is indivi- 
duality existing in itself, but with a nature as its 

Ibid. p. 66. 
Accursing Eutyches as a heretic. 

It puzzles me to understand what sense Field gave 
to the word, heresy. Surely every slight error, even 
though persevered in, is not to be held a heresy, or 
its asserters accursed. The error ought at least to 
respect some point of faith essential to the great ends 
of the Gospel. Thus the phrase * cui'sing Eutyches,* 
is to me shockingly unchristian. I could not dare 
call even the opinion cursed, till I saw how it injured 


the faith in Christ, weakened our confidence in him, 
or lessened our love and gratitude. 

Ibid. p. 71. 

If ye he circumcised ye are fallen from grace, and Christ can 
profit you nothyng. 

It seems impossihle hut that these words had a 
relation to the particular state of feeling and belief, 
out of which the anxiety to be circumcised did in 
those particular persons proceed, and not absolutely, 
and at all times to the act itself, seeing that St. Paul 
himself circumcised Timothy from motives of charity 
and prudence. 

IHd. c. iii p. 76. 

The things that pertain to the Christian faith and rehgion 
are of two sorts ; for there are some things explicite, some 
things impUcite credenda ; that is, there are some things that 
must be particularly and expressly known and believed, as 
that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost 
God, and yet they are not three Gods but one God; and 
some other, which though all men, at all times, be not bound 
upon the peril of damnation to know and believe expressly, 
yet whosoever will be saved must believe them at least 
implicite, and in generality, as that Joseph, Mary, and Jesus 
fled into Egypt. 

Merciful Heaven ! Eternal misery and the immi- 
tigable wrath of God, and the inextinguishable fire of 
hell, amid devils, parricides, and haters of God and 
all goodness — this is the verdict which a Protestant 
divine passes against the man, who though sincerely 
believing the whole Nicene Creed and every doctrine 
and precept taught in the New Testament, and living 
accordingly, should yet have convinced himself that 


the first chapters of St. Matthew and St. Luke were 
not parts of the original Gospels ! 

lUd, p. 77. 

So in the beginning, Kestorius did not err, touching the 
unity of Christ's person in the diversity of the natures of 
God and man ; but only disliked that Mary should be called 
the mother of Gk>d: which form of speaking when some 
demonstrated to be very fitting and unavoidable, if Christ were 
Gk>d and man in the unity of the same person, he chose rather 
to deny the unity of Christ's person than to acknowledge his 
temerity and rashness in reproving that form of speech, which 
the use of the Church had anciently received and allowed. 

A false charge grounded on a misconception of the 
Syriac terms. Nestorius was perfectly justifiable in 
his rejection of the epithet O^otokos, as applied to the 
mother of Jesus. The Church was even then only 
too ripe for the idolatrous hyper-dulia of the Virgin. 
Not less weak is Field's defence of the propriety of 
the term. Set aside all reference to this holy mystery, 
and let me ask, I trust without offence, whether by 
the same logic a mules dam might not be called 
iTTiroro/coy, because the horse and ass were united in 
one and the same subject? The difference in the 
perfect God and perfect man does not remove the 
objection : for an epithet, which conceals half of a 
truth, the power and special concemingness of which, 
relatively to our redemption by Christ, depends on 
our knowledge of the whole, is a deceptive and a 
dangerously deceptive epithet. 

Ibid, c XX. p. 110. 

Thus, then, the Fathers did sometimes, when they had 
particular occasions to remember the Saints, and to speak of 
them, by way of apottrophe, turn themselves unto them, and 


use words of doubtful compellation, praying them, if they 
have any sense of these inferior things, to be remembrancers 
to God for them. 

The distinct gradations of the process, by which 
commemoration and rhetorical apostrophes passed 
finally into idolatry, supply an analogy of mighty 
force against the heretical hypothesis of the modem 
Unitarians. Were it true, they would have been 
able to have traced the progress of the Christolatry 
from the lowest sort of Christodulia with the same 
historical distinctness against the universal Church, 
that the Protestants have that of hierolatry against 
the Romanists. The gentle and soft censures which 
our divines during the reign of the Stuarts pass on the 
Eoman Saint worship, or hieroduly, as an inconve- 
nient superstition, must needs have alarmed the 
faithful adherents to the Protestantism of Edward VI. 
and the surviving exiles of bloody Queen Mary's 
times, and their disciples. 

lUd, p. 111. 

The miracles that God wrought in times past by them made 
many to attribute more to them than was fit, as if they had 
a generality of presence, knowledge, and working ; but the 
wisest and best advised never durst attribute any such thing 
unto them. 

To a truly pious mind awfully impressed with the 
surpassing excellency of God's ineffable love to fallen 
man, in the revelation of himself to the inner man 
through the reason and conscience by the spiritual 
light and substantiality — (for the conscience is to the 
spirit or reason what the understanding is to the 
sense, a substantiative power) ; this consequence of 
miracles is so fearful, that it cannot but redouble his 
zeal against that fiashion of modem theologists which 


would convert miracles from a motive to attention and 
solicitous examination, and at best from a negative 
condition of revelation, into the positive foundation 
of Christian faith. 

Ibid, cxxii p. 116. 

Bat if this be as vile a slander as ever Satanist deyined, the 
Lord reward tbem that have been the autbors and advisers 
of it according to their works. 

O no ! no ! this the good man did not utter from 
his heart, but from his passion. A vile and wicked 
slander it was and is. may God have turned the 
hearts of those who uttered it, or may it be among 
their unknown sins done in ignorance, for which the 
infinite merits of Christ may satisfy ! I am most 
assured that if Dr. Field were now alive, or if any 
one had but said this to him, he would have replied 
— ** I thank thee, brother, for thy Christian admoni- 
tion. Add thy prayer, and pray God to forgive me 
my inconsiderate zeal ! " 

Ihid. c. xxiii. p. 119. 

For what rectitude is due to the specificol act of hating 
God? or what rectitude is it capable of? 

Is this a possible act to any man understanding by 
the word God what we mean by God ? 

JUd. p. 129. 

It is this complicated dispute, as to the origin and 
permission of evil, which supplies to atheism its most 
plausible, because its only moral arguments ; but 
more especially to that species of atheism which 
existed in Greece in the form of polytheism, admitting 


moral and intelligent sbapers and governors of the 
world, but denying an intelligent ground, or self- 
conscious Creator of the universe ; their gods being 
themselves the offspring of chaos and necessity, that 
is, of matter and its essential laws or properties. 
The Leibnitzian distinction of the Eternal Reason, 
or nature of God, to Oelov (the vovs kol oviyKrj of 
Timaeus Locrus) from the will or personal attributes 
of God — (Oikrjixa kol ^ovXtjo-ls — ayaOov irarpos 
ayaOov l3ovX.rjixa) — planted the germ of the only 
possible solution, or rather, perhaps in words less ex- 
ceptionable and more likely to be endured in the 
schools of modem theology, brought forward the truth 
involved in Behmen's too bold distinction of God and 
the ground of God ; — who yet in this is to be excused, 
not only for his good aim and his ignorance of scho- 
lastic terms, but likewise because some of the Fathers 
expressed themselves no less crudely in the other 
extreme ; though it is not improbable that the mean- 
ing was the same in both. At least Behmen con- 
stantly makes self-existence a positive act, so as that 
by an eternal Ttepvyj^p-qa-is or mysterious intercircula- 
tion God wills himself out of the ground {jo Odov, 
— TO kv Kal TTCLVy — indifferentia absoluta realitatis 
infinitm et infinitcR potentialitatis) — and again by his 
will, as God existing, gives being to the ground, 
avToyevrjs — avTocpvris — vlos eavrov. Solus Deus est; 
— itaque principium, qui ex seipso dedit sibi ipse prin- 
cipium, Deus ipse sui origo est, sucRque causa sub- 
stanticEy id quod est, ex se et in se continens. Ex 
seipso procreatus ipse se fecit, &c., of Synesius, Jerome, 
Hilary, and Lactantius and others involve the same 

Ibid. c. xxvii. p. 140. 

The seventh is the heresy of Sabellius ; which he saith was 
revived by Servetus. So it was indeed, that Servetus revived 


In our time the damnable heresy of Sabellius, long since 
ocmdenmed in the first ages of the Church. But what is that 
to us ? How little approbation he found amongst us, the 
just and honourable proceeding against him at Qenera will 
witness to all posterity. 

Shocking as this act most and ought to be to all 
Christians at present ; yet this passage and a hun- 
dred still stronger from divines and Church letters 
contemporaiy with Calvin, prove Servetus* death not 
to be Calvin's guilt especially, but the common appro- 
hrium of all European Christendom, — of the Eomanists 
whose laws the Senate of Geneva followed, and from 
fear of whose reproaches (as if Protestants favoured 
heresy) they executed them, — and of the Protestant 
churches who applauded the act and returned thanks 
to Calvin and the Senate for it.* 

Ibid. c. zzz. p. 148. 

The twelfth heresy imputed to us is the heresy of Joviniau, 
concerning whom we must observe, that Augustine ascribeth 
unto him two opinions which Hierome mentioneth not ; who 
yet was not likely to spare him, if he might truly have been 
charged with thenu The first, that Mary ceased to be a 
virgin when she had borne Christ ; the second, that all ains 
are equal 

Neither this nor that is worthy the name of 
opinion ; it is mere unscriptural, nay, anti-scriptural 
gossiping. Are we to blame, or not rather to praise, 
the anxiety manifested by the great divines of the 
Church of England under the Stuarts not to remove 
further than necessary from the Romish doctrines? 
Yet one wishes a bolder method ; for example, as to 

• See Table Talk, 2d. edit. p. 288. Melancthon's words to Calyin are : 
— Tnojudido prorsus assentior. Jfflrmo etiam vtstros magiatratua juste 
feeisae, quod hominem hUupTiemunij re ordine JudicatOf inter/ecerunt. 14th 
Oct. 1664.— !£», 

VOL. I. X 


Mary's private history after the conception and birth 
of Christ, we neither know nor care about it. 

Ibid. c. xzxi. p. 146. 

For the opmions wherewith Hierome chargeth him, this 
we briefly answer. First, if he absolutely denied that the 
Saints departed do pray for us, as it seemeth he did by 
Hierome's reprehension, we think he erred. 

Yet not heretically ; and if he meant only that we 
being wholly ignorant, whether they do or no, ought 
to act as if we knew they did not, he is perfectly 
right ; for whatever ye do, do it in faith. As to the 
ubiquity of saints, it is Jerome who is the heretic, 
nay, idolater, if he reduced his opinion to practice. 
It perplexes me, that Field speaks so doubtingly on 
a matter so plain as the incommunicability of omni- 

Ibid. c. xxxiL p. 147. 

Touching the second ohjection, that Bucer and Calvin deny 
original sin, though not generally, as did Zuinglius, yet at 
least in the children of the faithfuL If he had said that 
these men affirm the earth doth move, and the heavens stand 
still, he might have as soon justified it against them, as this 
he now saith. 

Very noticeable. A similar passage occurs even 
so late as in Sir Thomas Brown, just at the dawn of 
the Newtonian system, and after Kapler. What a 
lesson of diffidence ! * 

Ibid. p. 148. 

For we do not deny the distinction of venial and mortal 
sins; but do think, that some sins are rightly said to be 

• " But to chrcle the earth, a$ the heavenly bodies do," &c. " So we may 
see that the opinion of Copernicus touching the rotation of the earth, 
which astronomy itself cannot correct, because it is not repugnant to 
any of the pTienomena, yet lutturcU history may correct,"— Advancement of 
Learninjf B.II,— Ed, 


mortal and some venial ; not for that some are worthy of 
eternal punishment and therefore named mortal, others of 
temporal only, and therefore judged venial as the Papists 
imagine : but for that some exclude grace out of that man 
in which they are found, and ao leave him in a state wherein 
he hath nothing in himself that can or will procure him 
pardon : and other, which though in themselves considered, 
and never remitted, they be worthy of eternal punishment, 
yet do not so &r prevail as to banish grace, the fountain of 
remission of all misdoings. 

Would not the necessaiy consequence of this be, 
that there are no actions that can be pronounced 
mortal sins by mortals; and that what we might 
fancy venial might in individual cases be mortal and 
vice versa. 


First, because every offence against God may justly be 
punished by him in the strictness of his righteous judgments 
with eternal death, yea, with annihilation ; which appeareth 
to be most true, for that there is no punishment so evil, and 
so much to be avoided, as the least sin that maybe imagined. 
So that a man should rather choose eternal death, yea, utter 
annihilation, than commit the least offence in the world. 

I admit this to be Scriptural ; but what is wanted 
is, clearly to state the difference between eternal 
death and annihilation. For who would not prefer 
the latter, if the former mean everlasting misery ? 

Ibid. c. xli. p. 62. marg. 

But he will say, Cyprian calleth the Roman Church the 
principal Church whence sacerdotal unity hath her spring ; 
hereunto we answer, that the Roman Church, not in power 
of overruling all, but in order is the first and principal ; and 
that therefore while she continueth to hold the truth, and 
encroacheth not upon the right of other Churches, she is to 
have the priority ; but that in either of these cases she may 



be forsaken without breach of that unity, which is essentially 
required in the parts of the Church. 

This is too large a concession. The real ground 
of the priority of the Eoman see was that Rome, 
for the first three or perhaps four centeiries, was the 
metropolis of the Christian world. Afterwards for 
the very same reason the Patriarch of New Eome or 
Constantinople claimed it ; and never ceased to 
assert at least a co-equality. Had the Apostolic 
foundation been the cause, Jerusalem and Antioch 
must have had priority ; not to add that the Eoman 
Church was not founded by either Paul or Peter as 
j^ evident from the Epistle to the Romans. 

Append. B. III. p. 206. 

I do not think the attack on Transubstantiation 
the most successful point of the orthodox Protestant 
controversialists. The question is, what is meant in 
Scripture, as in John vi. by Christ's body or flesh 
and blood. Surely not the visible, tangible, accidental 
body, that is, a cycle of images and sensations in the 
imagination of the beholders ; but his supersensual 
body, the noumenon of his human nature which was 
united to his divine nature. In this sense I under- 
stand the Lutheran ubiquity. But may not the 
" oblations " referred to by Field in the old canon of 
the Mass, have meant the alms, offerings always 
given at the Eucharist? If by "substance" in the 
enunciation of the article, be meant id quod vere est, 
and if the divine nature be the sole em vere ens, then 
it is possible to give a philosophically intelligible 
sense to Luther's doctrine of consubstantiation ; at 
least to a doctrine that might bear the same name ; 
at all events the mystery is not greater than, if it be 
not rather the same as, the assumption of the human 


by the divine nature. Now for the possible concep- 
tion of this we must accurately discriminate the 
incompossibile negativum from the incompatibUe pn- 
vativum. Of the latter are all positive imperfections, 
as error, vice, and evil passions; of the former, 
simple limitation. Thus if {per impossibile) human 
nature could make itself sinless and perfect, it would 
become or pass into God ; and if God should abstract 
from human nature all imperfection, it might without 
impropriety be affirmed, even as Scripture doth 
afi&rm, that God assumed or took up into himself 
the human nature. Thus, to use a dim similitude 
and merely as a fiGdnt illustration, all materiality 
abstracted from a circle, it would become space, and 
though not infinite, yet one with infinite space. The 
mystery of omnipresence greatly aids this conception; 
totus in omni parte: and in truth this is the divine 
character of all the Christian mysteries, that they 
aid each other, and many incomprehensibles render 
each of them, in a certain qualified sense, less incom- 

Ibid. p. 208. 

But first, it is impious to think of destroying Christ in any 
sort. For though it be true, that in sacrificing of Christ on 
the altar of the cross, the destroying and killing of him was 
implied, and this his death was the life of the world, yet all 
that concurred to the killing of him, as the Jews, the Roman 
soldiers, Pilate, and Judas sinned damnably, and so had done, 
though they had shed his blood with an intention and desire, 
that by it the world might be redeemed. 

Is not this going too far ? Would it not imply 
almost that Christ himself could not righteously 
sacrifice himself, especially when we consider that 
the Romanists would have a right to say, that 
Christ himself had commanded it ? But Bellarmine*s 


conceit * is so absurd that it scarce deserves the com- 
pliment of a serious confutation. For if sacramental 
being be opposed to natural or material, as noumenon 
to ph€Bnomenon, place is no attribute or possible 
accident of it in ae; consequently, no alteration of 
place relatively to us can affect, much less destroy, 
it ; and even were it otherwise, yet translocation is 
not destruction ; for the body of Christ, according to 
themselves, doth indeed nourish our souls, even as a 
fish eaten sustains another fish, but yet with this 
essential difference, that it ceases not to be and 
remain itself, and instead of being converted, con- 
verts ; so that truly the only things sacrificed in the 
strict sense are all the evil qualities or deficiencies 
which divide our souls from Christ. 

lUd. p. 218. 

That which we do is done in remembrance of that which 
was then done ; for he saith, Do this m remenibrance of me. 

This is a metastasis of Scripture. Do this in 
remembrance of me, that is, that which Christ was 
then doing. But Christ was not then suffering or 
dying on the cross. 

Ibid. p. 228. 

That the Saints do pray for us m genere, desiring Gk>d to 
be merciful to us, and to do unto us whatsoever in any kind 
he knoweth needful for our good, there is no question made 
by us. 

To have placed this question in its true light, 
so as to have allowed the full force to the Scriptures 

* That Christ had a twofold being, natural and sacramental ; that the 
Jews destroyed and sacrificed his natural being, and that Christian 
priests destroy and sacrifice in the Mass his sacramental being — Ed. 


asderting the communion of Saints and the efficacy 
of their intercession without undue concessions to 
the hieroUUria of the Eomish church, would have 
implied an acquaintance with the science of tran- 
scendental analysis, and an insight into the philosophy 
of ideas not to be expected in Field, and which was 
then only dawning in the mind of Lord Bacon. The 
proper reply to Brerely would be this : the com- 
munion and intercession of Saints is an idea, and 
must be kept such. But the Romish church has 
changed it away into the detail of particular and 
individual conceptions and imaginations, into names 
and fancies. 

N.B. Instead of the * Roman Catholic' read 
throughout in this and all other works, and every- 
where, and on all occasions, unless where the duties 
of formal courtesy forbid, say, the * Romish anti- 
Catholic Church ;* Romish — to mark that the cor- 
ruptions in discipline, doctrine and practice do for 
the worst and far larger part owe both their origin 
and their perpetuation to the cx)urt and local tribunals 
of the city of Rome, and are not and never have been 
the catholic, that is, universal faith of the Roman 
empire, or even of the whole Latin or Western 
church ; and anti- Catholic, — because no other Church 
acts on so narrow and excommunicative a principle, 
or is characterised by such a jealous spirit of monopoly 
and particularism, counterfeiting catholicity by a 
negative totality and heretical self-circumscription, 
cutting off, or cutting herself off from, all the other 
members of Christ's Body. — 12th March, 1824. 

It is of the utmost importance, wherever clear 
and distinct conceptions are required, to make out in 
the first instance whether the term in question, or the 
main terms of the question in dispute, represents 
or represent a fact or class of facts simply, or some 


self-established and previously known idea or prin- 
ciple, of which the facts are instances and realisations, 
or which is introduced in order to explain and account 
for the facts. Now the term * merits,' as applied to 
Abraham and the saints, belongs to the former. It 
is a mere nomen appeUatwum of the facts. 

Ibid, c. y. p. 252. 

The Papists and we agree that original sin is the privation 
of original righteousness ; but they suppose there was in 
nature without that addition of grace, a power to do good, &c. 

Nothing seems wanting to this argument but a 
previous defiuition and explanation of the term 
* nature.* Field appears to have seen the truth, 
namely, that nature itself is a peccant (I had almost 
said an unnatural) state, or rather no state at all, 
ov (rria-iSy oXA' dTroorao-ts, 

Ibid. c. vi. p. 269. 

And surely the words of Augustine do not import that she 
had no sin, but that she overcame it, which argueth a conflict ,* 
neither doth he say he will acknowledge she was without 
sin, but that he will not move any question touching her, in 
this dispute of sins and sinners. 

Why not say at once, that this anti- Scriptural 
superstition had already begun? I scarcely know 
whether to be pleased or grieved with that edging on 
toward the Roman creed, that exceeding, almost 
Scriptural, tenderness for the divines of the fourth, 
fifth, and sixth centuries, which distinguishes the 
Church of England dignitaries, from Elizabeth in- 
clusively to our Revolution in 1688, from other 


Ibid. C. z. p. 279. 

Derwent ! should this page chance to fall under 
your eye, for my sake read, fag, subdue, and take up 
into your proper mind this chapter X. of Free Will. 

Ibid, p. 281. 

Of these five kinds of liberty, the two first agree only to 
(}od, so that in the highest degree rh can^oiwunf, that is, 
fireedom of will is proper to God only ; and in this tense 
Calvin and Luther rightly deny that the will of any creature 
is or ever was free. 

I add, except as in God, and God in us. Now the 
latter alone is will ; for it alone is em mper ens. 
And here lies the mystery, which I dare not openly 
and promiscuously reveal. 


Yet doth not God's working upon the will take from it 
the power of dissenting, and doing the contrary ; but so in- 
clineth it, that having liberty to do otherwise, yet she will 
actually determine so. 

This will not do. Were it true, then my under- 
standing would be free in a mathematical proportion ; 
or the whole position amounts only to this, that the 
will, though compelled, is still the will. Be it so ; 
yet not a free will. In short, Luther and Calvin are 
right so far. A creaturely will cannot be free ; but 
the will in a rational creature may cease to be 
creaturely, and the creature, A-Troorao-ts, finally cease 
in consequence ; and this neither Luther nor Calvin 
seem to have seen. In short, where omnipotence is 
on one side, what but utter impotence can remain for 
the other ? To make freedom possible, the antithesis 
must be removed. The removal of this antithesis of 


the creature to God is the object of the Redemption, 
and forms the glorious liberty of the Gospel. More 
than this I am not permitted to expose. 

Ibid. p. 283. 

It is not given, nor is it wanting, to all men to 
have an insight into the mystery of the human 
will and its mode of inherence on the will which 
is God, as the ineffable causa sui ; but this chapter 
will suffice to convince you that the doctrines of 
Calvin were those of Luther in this point; — that 
they are intensely metaphysical, and that they are 
diverse toto genere from the merely moral and 
psychological tenets of the modem Calvinists. Calvin 
would have exclaimed * fire and fagots !* before he 
had gotten through a hundred pages of Dr. 
Williams's Modem Calvinism. 

Ibid. c. xi. p. 296. 

Neither can Vega avoid the evidence of the testimonies of 
the Fathers, and the decree of the Council of Trent, so that 
he must be forced to confess that no man can so collectively 
fulfil the law as not to sin, and consequently, that no man 
can perform that the law requireth. 

The paralogism of Vega, as to this perplexing 
question seems to lurk in the position that God 
gives a law which it is impossible we should obey 
collectively. But the truth is, that the law whicli 
God gave, and which from the essential holiness 
of his nature it is impossible he should not have 
given, man deprived himself of the ability to obey. 
And was the law of God therefore to be annulled? 
Must the sun cease to shine because the earth has 
become a morass, so that even that very glory of 


the sun hath become a new cause of its steaming 
up clouds and vapors that strangle the rays ? God 
forbid ! But for the law I had not sinned. But 
had I not been sinful the law would not have 
occasioned me to sin, but would have clothed me 
with righteousness, bj the transmission of its 
splendour. Let God be just, and every man a liar. 

R IV. c. iv. p. 846. 

The Church of God is named the * Pillar of Truth; ' not 
as if truth did depend on the Church, &c. 

Field might have strengthened his argument, by 
mention of the custom of not only affixing records 
and testimonials to the pillars, but books, &c. 

Ibid. c. yii p. 858. 

Others therefore, to avoid this absurdity, run into that 
other before mentioned, that we believe the things that 
are divine by the mere and absolute command of our will, 
not finding any sufficient motives and reasons of persuasion. 

Field, nor Count Mirandula have penetrated to 
the heart of this most fundamental question. In 
all proper faith the will is the prime agent, but not 
therefore the choice. You may call it reason if you 
will, but then carefully distinguish the speculative 
from the practical reason, and the reason itself 
from the imderstanding. 

IMd. c. viiL p. 866. 

lUi/us virttUe (saith he) iUvmi/n(xt% jam non aiU nostro, cvut 
aliorum judicio credirmu a Deo esse Sciiptv/ram, sed supra 
humcmum jvdicivm certo certius constituimus, non secits ac si 
ipsitis Dei numen Ulic intueremv/Tf homimim ministerio ah 
ipsissimo Dei ore Jltixisse. 


Greatly doth this fine passage need explanation, 
that knowing what it doth mean, the reader may 
understand what it doth not mean, nor of necessity 
imply. Without this insight, our faith may he 
terribly shaken by difficulties and objections. For 
example ; If all the Scripture, then each component 
part ; thence every faithful Christian infallible, and 
so on. 

Ibid, p. 367. 

In the second the light of divine reason causeth approbation 
of that they believe : in the third sort, the purity of divine 
understanding apprehendeth most certainly the things 
believed, and causeth a foretasting of those things that 
hereafter more fully shall be enjoyed. 

Here too Field distinguishes the understanding 
from the reason, as experience following perception 
of sense. But as perception through the mere pre- 
sence of the object perceived, whether to the outward 
or inner sense, is not insight which belongs to the 
* light of reason,* therefore Field marks it by * purity' 
that is unmixed with fleshly sensations or the idola 
of the bodily eye. Though Field is by no means i 
consistent in his epitheta of the understanding, he I 
seldom confounds the word itself. In theological; 
Latin, the understanding, as influenced and com-! 
bined with the affections and desires, is most fre- 
quently expressed by cor, the heart. Doubtless the j 
most convenient form of appropriating the terms! 
would be to consider the understanding as man's ^ 
intelligential faculty, whatever be its object, the 
sensible or the intelligible world ; while reason is 
the tri-unity, as it were, of the spiritual eye, light, 
and object. '\ 

Ibid, c. X. p. 868. ~^ 

Of the Papists preferring the Church's authority before the 


Field, from the nature and special purpose of 
his controversy, b reluctant to admit any error in 
the Fathers, — too much so indeed; and this is an 
instance. We all know what we mean hy the 
Scriptures, hut how know we what they mean by 
the Church, which is neither thing nor person ? But 
this is a very difficult subject 

Ibid. p. 859. 

First, 80 as if the Church might define contrary to the 
Scriptures, as she may contrary to the writings of particular 
men, how great soever. 

Verbally, the more sober divines of the Church 
of Bome do not assert this ; but practically and by 
consequence they do. For if the Church assign a 
sense contradictory to the true sense of the Scrip- 
ture, none dare gainsay it.* 


This we deny, and will in due place improve their error 

That is, prove against, detect, or confute. 

Ibid. c. xi. p. 860. 

If the comparison be made between the Church consisting 
of all the believers that are and have been since Christ 
appeared in the flesh, so including the Apostles, and their 
blessed assistants the Evangelists, we deny not but that the 
Church is of greater authority, antiquity, and excellency than 
the Scriptures of the New Testament, as the witness is better 
than his testimony, and the law-giver greater than the laws 
made by him, as Stapleton allegeth. 

* Fides eaiholieOf says Bellarmine, doeet omnem viriutem esse iKmant, 
ornne vitium esse malum. SH autem erraret Papa prcecipiendo iritia vel pro- 
hibendovirtutes, teneretur Ecdesia credere vitia esse lona et virtutes malas, 
nisi veUei contra consdentiam peeeare,—De Pmt. Boman, lY. 6.— Ed, 


The Scriptures may be and are an intelligible and 
real one, but the Ghurch on earth can in no sense be 
such in and through itself, that is, its component 
parts, but only by their common adherence to the 
body of truth made present in the Scripture. Surely 
you would not distinguish the Scripture from its 
contents ? 

Ibid, c. xiL p. 361. 

For the better understanding whereof we must observe, as 
Occam fitly noteth, that an article of faith is sometimes 
strictly taken only for one of those divine verities, which are 
contained in the Creed of the Apostles : sometimes generally 
for any catholic verity. 

I am persuaded, that this division will not bear to 
be expanded into all its legitimate consequences sine 
periculo velfidei vel charitatis. I should substitute 
the following : 1. The essentials of that saving faith, 
which having its root and its proper and primary 
seat in the moral will, that is, in the heart and 
affections, is necessary for each and every individual 
member of the church of Christ : — 2. Those truths 
which are essential and necessary in order to the 
logical and rational possibility of the former, and the 
belief and assertion of which are indispensable to the 
Church at large, as those truths without which the 
body of believers, the Christian world, could not have 
been and cannot be continued, though it be possible 
that in this body this or that individual may be saved 
without the conscious knowledge of, or an explicit 
belief in, them. 


And therefore before and without such determination, men 
seeing clearly the deduction of things of this nature from the 
former, and refusing to believe them, are condemned of 
heretical pertinacy. 


Rather, I should think, of a nondescript lunacy 
than of heretical pravity. A child may explicitly 
know that 6 + 5 = 10, yet not see that therefore 
10 — 5 ^ 6 ; but when he has seen it how he can 
refrain from believing the latter as much as the 
former, I haye no conception. 

Ibid. c. xyL p. 367. 

And the third of jurisdiction ; and so they that have 
supreme power, that is, the Bishops assembled in a general 
Council, may interpret the Scriptures, and by their authority 
suppress all them that shall gainsay such interpretations, and 
subject every man that shall disobey such determinations 
as they consent upon, to excommunication and censures of 
like nature. 

This would be satisfactory, if only Field had 
cleared the point of the communion in the Lord's 
Supper ; whether taken spiritually, though in conse- 
quence 6f excommunication not ritually, it yet suffice th 
to salvation. If so, excommunication is merely de- 
clarative, and the evil follows not the declaration but 
that which is truly declared, as when Richard says 
that Francis deserves the gallows, as a robber. The 
gallows depends on the fact of the robbery, not ou 
Bichard's saying. 

Ibid. c. xxix. p. 391. 

In the 1 Cor. 15., the Greek, that now is, bath in all copies ; 
the first man was of the earth, earthly ; the second ma/n is the 
Lord from Heaven, The latter part of this sentence Tertullian 
supposeth to have been corrupted, and altered by the Mar- 
cionites. Instead of that the Latin text hath ; the second man 
was from heaven, heavenly y as Ambrose, Hierome, and many 
of the Fathers read also. 

There ought to be, and with any man of taste there 


can be, no doubt that our version is the true one. 
That of Ambrose and Jerome is worthy of mere 
rhetoricians ; a flat formal play of antithesis instead 
of the weight and solemnity of the other.* According 
to the former the scales are even, in the latter the 
scale of Christ drops down at once, and the other 
flies to the beam like a feather weighed against a 
mass of gold. 

Append. Part. L s. iv. p. 752. 

And again he saith, that every soul, immediately upon the 
departure hence, is in this appointed invisible place, having 
there either pain, or ease and refreshing ; that there the rich 
man is in pain, and the poor in a comfortable estate. For, 
saith he, why should we not think, that the souls are tor- 
mented, or refreshed in this invisible place, appointed for 
them in expectation of the future judgment ? 

This may be adduced as an instance, specially, of 
the evil consequences of introducing the idolon of 
time as an ens reale into spiritual doctrines, thus 
understanding literally what St. Paul had expressed 
by figure and adaptation. Hence the doctrine of a 
middle state, and hence Purgatory with all its abomi- 
nations ; and an instance, generally, of the incalculable 
possible importance of speculative errors on the hap- 
piness and virtue of mankind. 

• The ordinary Greek text is v—i divnf «$ «v0(Mros, i KC^tos i^ cv^clvcu. 
The Yolgate is : primus homo de terra, terrenus; seeundus Jiomo de ccelis, 
caleatis, — Ed. 



— ♦— 

There have been many, and those illustrious, 
divines in our Church from Elizabeth to the present 
day, Yfho, overvaluing the accident of antiquity, and 
arbitrarily determining the appropriation of the words 
* ancient,' * primitive,' and the like to a certain date, 
as' for example, to all before the fourth, Mth, or 
sixth century, were resolute protesters against the 
corruptions and tyranny of the Eomish hierarch, and 
yet lagged behind Luther and the Reformers of the 
first generation. Hence I have long seen the neces- 
sity or expedience of a threefold division of divines. 
There are many, whom God forbid that I should call 
Papistic, or, like Laud, Montague, Heylyn, and 
others, longing for a Pope at Lambeth, whom yet 1 
dare not name Apostolic. Therefore I divide our 
theologians into, 1. Apostolic or Pauline : 2. Pa- 
tristic: 3. Papal. Even in Donne, and still more 
in Bishops Andrews and Hackett, there is a strong 
Patristic leaven. In Jeremy Taylor this taste for 
the Fathers and all the Saints and Schoolmen before 
the Reformation amoimted to a dislike of the divines 
of the continental Protestant Churches, Lutheran or 
Calvinistic. But this must, in part at least, be 
attributed to Taylor's keen feelings as a Carlist, and 
a sufferer by the Puritan anti-prelatic party. 

* The LXXX. Sermons, fol. 1640.— JSa. 
VOL. I. F 

66 DONNE. 

I would thus class the pentad of operative Chris- 
tianity : — 

Christ, the Word. 
Thesis, Mesothesis. Antithesis, 

The Scriptures. The Holy Spirit. The Church. 

The Preacher. 

The Papacy elevated the Church to the virtual 
exclusion or suppression of the Scriptures: the 
modem Church of England, since Chilling worth, 
has so raised up the Scriptures as to annul the 
Church ; both alike have quenched the Holy Spirit, 
as the mesothesis of the two, and substituted an alien 
compound for the genuine Preacher, who should be 
the synthesis of the Scriptures and the Church, and 
the sensible voice of the Holy Spirit. 

SERMON J.-^Coloss. i. 19, 20. p. 1. 
Ibid. E. 

"What could God pay for me 1 What could God suffer ? 
God himself could not : and therefore Gk)d hath taken a body 
that could. 

God forgive me, — or those who first set abroad 
this strange fierdlSaa-ts ek aXXo yivos, this debtor 
and creditor scheme of expounding the mystery of 
Redemption, or both ! But I never can read the 
words, * God himself could not ; and therefore took a 
body that could ' — without being reminded of the 
monkey that took the cat's paw to take the chesnuts 
out of the fire, and claimed the merit of puss's 
sufferings. I am sure, however, that the ludicrous 
images, under which this gloss of the Calvinists 
embodies itself to my fancy, never disturb my recol- 

DONNE. 67 

lections of the adorable mystery itself. It is clear 
that a body» remaining a body, can only suffer as a 
body ; for no fiEiith can enable us to belieye that the 
same thing can be at once A and not A. Now that 
the body of our Lord was not transelemented or 
transnatured by the pleroma indwelling, we are posi- 
tively assured by Scripture. Therefore it would 
follow from this most unscriptural doctrine, that the 
divine justice had satis&ction made to it by the 
suffering of a body which had been brought into 
existence for this special purpose, in lieu of the debt 
of eternal misery due from, and leviable on, the 
bodies and souls of all mankind! It is to this 
gross perversion of the sublime idea of the Redemp- 
tion by the cross, that we must attribute the rejection 
of the doctrine of redemption by the Unitarian, and 
of the Gospel in toto by the more consequent Deist. 

Ibid. p. 2. C. 

And yet, even this dwelling fullness, even in this person 
Christ Jesus, by no title of merit in himself, but only quia 
complacuit, because it pleased the Father it should be so. 

This, in the intention of the preacher, may have 
been sound, but was it safe, divinity ? In order to 
the latter, methinks, a less equivocal word than 
* person * ought to have been adopted ; as, * the 
body and soul of the man Jesus, considered ab- 
stractedly from the divine Logos, who in it took up 
humanity into deity, and was Christ Jesus.' Dare 
we say that there was no self-subsistent, though we 
admit no self-originated, merit in the Christ? It 
seems plain to me, that in this and sundry other 
passages of St. Paul, the Father means the total 
triune Godhead. 

It appears to me, that dividing the Church of 

68 DONNE. 

England into two ceras — the first from Ridley to 
Field, or from Edward VI. to the commencement of 
the latter third of the reign of James I., and the 
second ending with Bull and Stillingfleet, we might 
characterise their comparative excellences thus : That 
the divines of the first sera had a deeper, more genial, 
and a more practical insight into the mystery of 
Redemption, in the relation of man toward hoth the 
act and the author, namely, in all the inchoative 
states, the regeneration and the operations of saving 
grace generally; — ^while those of the second aera 
possessed clearer and distincter views concerning the 
nature and necessity of Redemption, in the relation 
of God toward man, and concerning the connection of 
Redemption with the article of Tri-unity ; and above 
all, that they surpassed their predecessors in a more 
safe and determinate scheme of the divine economy 
of the three persons in the one undivided Godhead. 
This, indeed, was mainly owing to Bishop Bull's 
masterly work De Fide Nicmna,^ which in the next 
generation Watorland so admirably maintained, on 
the one hand, against the philosophy of the Arians, 
— the combat ending in the death and burial of 
Arianism, and its descent and metempsychosis into 
Socinianism, and thence again into modem Uni- 
tarianism, — and on the other extreme, against the 
oscillatory creed of Sherlock, now swinging to Tri- 
theism in the recoil from Sabelli£inism, and again to 
Sabellianism in the recoil from Tritheism, 

* " Mr. Coleridge's admiration of Boll and Waterland as high theo- 
logians was very great Bull he used to read in the Latin De/ensio 
Fidei NicamcBj using the Jesuit Zola's edition of 1784, which, I think, he 
bought at Rome. He told me once, that when he was reading a 
Protestant English Bishop's work on the Trinity, in a copy edited by an 
Italian Jesuit in Italy, he felt proud of the Church of England, and in 
good humour with the Church of Rome."— Taftte Talk, 2d. edit. p. 41.— Ed. 

DONNE. 69 


Fmt, we are to consider this fullness to have been in Christ, 
and then, from this fullness arose his merits ; we can consider 
DO merit in Christ himself before, whereby he should merit 
this fullness ; for this fullness was in him before he merited 
any thing ; and but for this fullness he had not so merited. 
lUe homo, ut in unUatemJUii Dei oMumeretwr^ unde meruit f 
How did that man (says St. Augustine, speaking of Christ, as 
of the son of man), bow did that man merit to be united in 
one person with the eternal Son of God 1 Qy,id egit ante t 
Quid crediditt What had he done? Nay, what had he 
believed ? Had he either faiih or works before that union of 
both natures 1 

Dr. Donne and St. Augustine said this without 
offence ; but I much question whether the same 
would be endured now. That it is, however, in the 
spirit of Paul and of the Gospel, I doubt not to 
affirm, and that this great truth is obscured by what 
in my judgment is the post- Apostolic ChrtstopcBdia, I 
am inclined to think. 


What canst thou imagine he could foresee in thee ? a pro- 
pensnees, a disposition to goodness, when his grace should 
come ? Either there is no such propensness, no such dis- 
position in thee, or, if there be, even that propensness and 
disposition to the good use of grace, is grace ; it is an effect of 
former grace, and his grace wrought before he saw any such 
propensness, any such disposition ; grace was first, and his 
grace is his, it is none of thine. 

One of many instances in dogmatic theology, in 
which the half of a divine truth has passed into a 
fearful error by being mistaken for the whole truth. 

70 DONNE. 

Ibid. p. 6. D. 

Qod's justice required blood, but that blood is not spilt, 
but poured from that head to our hearts, into the veins and 
wounds of our own souls : there was blood shed, but no blood 

It is affecting to observe how this great man's 
mind sways and oscillates between bis reason, which 
demands in the word * blood' a symbolic meaning, 
a spiritual interpretation, and the habitual awe for 
the letter; so that he himself seems uncertain 
whether he means the physical lymph, serum, and 
globules that trickled from the wounds of the 
nails and thorns down the sides and face of Jesus, 
or the blood of the Son of Man, which he who 
drinketh not cannot live. Yea, it is most affecting 
to see the struggles of so great a mind to preserve 
its inborn fealty to the reason under the servitude 
to an accepted article of belief, which was, alas ! 
confounded with the high obligations of faith; — 
faith the co-adunation of the finite individual will 
with the universal reason, by the submission of the 
former to the latter. To reconcile redemption by 
the material blood of Jesus with the mind of the 
spirit, he seeks to spiritualise the material blood itself 
in all men ! And a deep truth lies hidden even in 
this. Indeed the whole is a profound subject, the 
true solution of which may best, God's grace assisting, 
be sought for in the collation of Paul with John, 
and specially in St. Paul's assertion that we are 
baptized into the death of Christ, that we may be 
partakers of his resurrection and life.* It was not 
on the visible cross, it was not directing attention to 
the blood-drops on his temples and sides, that our 
blessed Redeemer said. This is my body, and this is 
my blood ! 

* Rom. vi. 3, 4, 6.—^. 


DONNE. 71 

Ibid, p. 9. A. 

But if we consider thoee who are in heayen, and have been 
so from the first minute of their creation, angels, why have 
they, or how have they any reconciliation ? &c. 

The history and successive meanings of the term 
' angels ' in the Old and New Testaments, and the 
idea that shall reconcile all as so many several forms, 
and as it were perspectives, of one and the same 
truth — this is still a desideratum in Christian theology. 

Ibid. C. 

For, at the general resurrection, (which is rooted in the 
resurrection of Christ, and so hath relation to him) the 
creature shaU he delivered from the bondage of corruption into 
the glorUma liberty of the children of Ood; for which the whole 
creation groane^ and travails in pain yet. (Rom. viii. 21.) This 
deliverance then from this bondage the whole creature hath 
by Christ, and that is their reconciliation. And then are we 
reconciled by the blood of his cross, when having crucified 
ourselves by a true repentance, we receive the real recon- 
ciliation in his blood in the sacrament. But the most proper 
and most literal sense of these words, is, that all things in 
heaven and earth be reconciled to Gk)d (that is, to his glory, 
to a fitter disposition to glorify him) by being reconciled to 
another in Christ ; that in him, as head of the church, they 
in heaven, and we upon earth, be united together, as one body 
in the communion of saints. 

A very meagre and inadequate interpretation of 
this sublime text. The philosophy of life, which will 
be the corona et finis coronans of the sciences of com- 
parative anatomy and zoology, will hereafter supply a 
fuller and nobler comment. 

Ibid. p. 9. A. and R 
The blood of the sacrifices was brought by the high priest 

72 DONNE. 

in sanctum sanctorum^ into the place of greatest holiness ; but 
it was brought but once, in festo expiationis, in the feast of 
expiation ; but in the other parts of the temple it was sprinkled 
every day. The blood of the cross of Christ Jesus hath had 
this effect in aancto 8an>ctorum, &c. * * * * (to) Christ Jesus. 

A truly excellent and beautiful paragraph. 

Ibid. C. 

If you will mingle a true religion, and a false religion, there 
is no reconciling of God and Belial in this text. For the 
adhering of persons bom within the Church of Rome to the 
Church of Rome, our law says nothing to them if they come ; 
but for reconciling to the Church of Rome, for persons born 
within the allegiance of the king, or for persuading of men to 
be so reconciled, our law hath called by an infamous and 
capital name of treason, and yet every tavern and ordinary is 
full of such traitors, &c. 

A strange transition from the Gospel to the 
English statute-book ! But I may observe, that if 
this statement could be truly made under James I., 
there was abundantly ampler ground for it in the 
following reign. And yet with what bitter spleen 
does Heylyn, Laud's creature, arraign the Parliament- 
arians for making the same complaint ! 

SERMON IL—Isaiak vii. 14. p. 11. 

The fear of giving offence, especially to good men, 
of whose faith in all essential points we are partakers, 
may reasonably induce us to be slow and cautious in 
making up our minds finally on a religious question, 
and may, and ought to, influence us to submit our 
conviction to repeated revisals and rehearsings. But 
there may arrive a time of such perfect clearness of 

DONNE. 73 

yiew respecting the particular point, as to supersede 
all fear of man by the higher duty of declaring the 
whole truth in Jesus. Therefore, having now over- 
passed six-sevenths of the ordinary period allotted 
to human life, — ^resting my whole and sole hope of 
salvation and immortality on the divinity of Christ, 
and the redemption by his cross and passion, and 
holding the doctrine of the Triune God as the very 
ground and foundation of the Gospel faith, — I feel 
myself enforced by conscience to declare and avow, 
that, in my deliberate judgment, the Christopcedia 
prefixed to the third Gospel and concorporated with 
the first, but, according to my belief, in its present 
form the latest of the four, was unknown to, or not 
recognised by, the Apostles Paul and John ; and 
that, instead of supporting the doctrine of the Trinity, 
and the Filial Godhead of the Incarnate Word, as 
set forth by John L 1, and by Paul, it, if not alto- 
gether irreconcilable with this faith, doth yet greatly 
weaken and bedim its evidence ; and that, by the too 
palpable contradictions between the narrative in 
the first Gospel and that in the third, it has been 
a fruitful magazine of doubts respecting the his- 
toric character of the Gospels themselves. I have 
read most of the criticisms on this text, and my 
impression is, that no learned Jew can be expected 
to receive the common interpretation as the true 
primary sense of the words. The severely literal 
Aquila renders the Hebrew word vcavis. But were 
it asked of me : Do you then believe our Lord to 
have been the Son of Mary by Joseph ? I reply : 
It is a point of religion with me to have no belief 
one way or the other. I am in this way like St. 
Paul, more than content not to know Christ himself 
Kara <ripKa» It is enough for me to know, that 
the Son of God became flesh, cap^ iyiviTO y^v6^fv^% 

74 DONNE. 

€/c yvvaiKhs,"^ and more than this, it appears to me, 
was unknown to the Apostles, or, if known, not 
taught hj them as appertaining to a sa\dng faith in 
Christ.— October, 1831. 

Note the affinity in soiuid of son and sun, Sohn 
and Sonne, which is not confined to the Saxon and 
German, or the Gothic dialects generally. And 
observe conciliare versdhnen=conJiliare, facere esse 
cum filio, one with the Son. 

Ibid. p. 17. B. 

It is a singular testimony, how acceptable to God that state 
of virginity is. He does not dishonour physic that magnifies 
health ; nor does he dishonour marriage, that praises virginity ; 
let them embrace that state that can, &c. 

• One of the sad relics of Patristic supermoralisation, 
aggravated by Papal ambition, which clung to too 
many divines, especially to those of the second or 
third generation after Luther. Luther himself was 
too spiritual, of too heroic faith, to be thus blinded 
by the declamations of the Fathers, whom, with the 
exception of Augustine, he held in very low esteem. 

Ihid. D. 
And Helvidius said, she had children after. 

Annon Scriptura ipsa 9 And a * heresy,* too ! 
I think I might safely put the question to any seri- 
ous, spiritual-minded Christian : What one inference 
tending to edification, in the discipline of will, mind, 
or affections, he can draw from the speculations of 
the last two or three pages of this Sermon respecting 
Mary's pregnancy and parturition ? Can — I write it 
emphatically — can such points appertain to our faith 
as Christians, which every parent would decline 

• John i. 14. Gal. Iv. 4.— £». 

DONNE. 75 

Speaking of before a family, and which, if the 
questions were propounded by another in the pre- 
sence of my daughter, ay, or even of my, no less, 
in mind and imagination, innocent wife, I should 
resent as an indecency ? 

SERMON III.— 6W. iv. 4, 6. p. 20. 
Chd sent forth his Son made of a woman. 

I never can admit that ycvofxcvov and iyivero in 
St. Paul and St. John are adequately, or even 
rightly, rendered by the English * made.* 

Ibid, p. 21. A. 

What miserable revolutions and changes, what downfalls, 
what break-necks and precipitations may we justly think 
ourselves ordained to, if we consider, that in our coming into 
this world out of our mother's womb, we do not make account 
that a child comes right, except it come with the head forward, 
and thereby prefigure that headlong feJling into calamities 
which it must suffer after 1 

The taste for these forced and fantastic analogies, 
Donne, with the greater number of the learned pre- 
latic divines from James I. to the Restoration, 
acquired from that too great partiality for the Fathers, 
from IrenflBus to Bemsurd, by which they sought to 
distinguish themselves from the Puritans. 


That now they (the Jews,) express a kind of conditional 
acknowledgment of it, by this barbarous and inhuman custom 
of theirs, that they always keep in readiness the blood of some 
Christian, with which they anoint the body of any that dies 
amongst them, with these words ; " If Jesus Christ were the 
Messias, then may the blood of this Christian avail thee to 
salvation ! " 

76 DONNE. 

Is it possible that Donne could have given credit 
to this absurd legend ! It was, I am aware, not an 
age of critical acumen; grit, bran, and flour, were 
swallowed in the unsifted mass of their erudition. 
Still, that a man like Donne should have imposed on 
himself such a set of idle tales, as he has collected 
in the next paragraph for facts of history, is scarcely 
credible ; that he should have attempted to impose 
them en others, is most melancholj. 

75tU p. 22. D., E. 

He takes the name of the son of a woman, and wcmes the 

miraculous name of son of a virgm. Christ wa/ned the 

glorious name of Son of Gkxl, and the miraculous name 
of Son of a virgin too ; which is not omitted to draw into 
doubt the perpetual virginity of the blessed virgin, the mother 
of Christ, &c. 

Very ingenious ; but likewise very presumptuous, 
this arbitrary attribution of St. Paul's silence, and 
presumable ignorance of the virginity of Mary, to 
Christ's own determination to have the fact passed 

N. B. Is * wane ' a misprint for * wave ' or * waive '? 
It occurs so often, as to render its being an erratum 
improbable ; yet I do not remember to have met 
elsewhere * wane ' used for * decline * as a verb 

Piid, p. 23. A. 

If there were reason for it, it were no miracle. 

The announcement of the first comet, that had 
ever been observed, might excite doubt in the mind 
of an astronomer, to whom, from the place where he 
lived, it had not been visible. But his reason could 
have been no objection to it. Had God pleased, all 

DOKKE. 77 

women might have conceived ivev tov avhpos, as 
many of the polypi and planaria do. Not on any 
such ground do I suspend myself on this as an article 
of fjEuth ; hut hecause I douht the evidence. 

Ibid. p. 25. A— E. 
Though we may think thus in the law of reason, yet, kc 

It is, and has heen, a misfortune, a grievous and 
manifold loss and hindrance for the interests of moral 
and spiritual truth, that even our host and most 
vigorous theologians and philosophers of the age 
from Edward VI. to James II. so generally confound 
the terms, and so too often confound the subjects 
themselves, reason and understanding ; yet the diver- 
sity, the difference in kind, was known to, and 
clearly admitted by, many of them, — by Hooker for 
instance, and it is implied in the whole of Bacon's 
Novum Organum. Instead of the * law of reason,' 
Donne meant, and ought to have said, * judging 
according to the ordinary presumptions of the under- 
standing,' that is, the faculty which, generalising 
particular experiences, judges of the future by ana- 
logy to the past. 

Taking the words, however, in their vulgar sense, 
I most deliberately protest against all the paragraphs 
in this page, from A to E, and should cite them, 
with a host of others, as sad effects of the confusion 
of the reason and the understanding, and of the 
consequent abdication of the former, instead of the 
bounden submission of the latter to a higher light. 
Faith itself is but an act of the will, assenting to the 
reason on its own evidence without, and even against, 
the understanding. This indeed is, I fully agree, to 
be brought into captivity to the faith.* 

* See the whole argument on the difference of the reason and the 
understanding, in the Aids to Inflection, drd ed. pp. 20&— ^SfZ .—Ed. 

78 DONNE. 

md. p. 26. A., B. 

And therefore to be wnder the Law, signifies here thus much ; 
to be a debtor to the law of nature, to have a testimony in 
our hearts and consciences, that there lies a law upon us, 
which we have no power in ourselves to perform, &c. 

This exposition of the term law in the epistles of 
St. Paul is most just and important. The whole 
should be adopted among the notes to the epistle to 
the Eomans, in every Bible printed with notes. 

Ihid, p. 27. A. 

And this was his first work, to redeem, to vindicate them 
from the usurper, to deliver them from the intruder, to 
emancipate them from the tyrant, to cancel the covenant 
between hell and them, and restore them so far to their 
liberty, as that they might come to their first master, if they 
would ,' this was redeeming. 

There is an absurdity in the notion of a finite 
divided from, and superaddible to, the infinite, — of a 
particular quantum of power separated from, not 
included in, omnipotence, or all-power. But, alas ! 
we too generally use the terms that are meant to 
express the absolute, as mere comparatives taken 
superlatively. In one thing only are we permitted 
and bound to assert a diversity, namely, in God and 
Hades, the good and the evil will. This awful mys- 
tery, tMs truth, at once certain and incomprehensible, 
is at the bottom of all religion ; and to exhibit this 
truth free from the dark phtgitom of the Manicheans, 
or the two co-eternal and co-ordinate principles of 
good and evil, is the glory of the Christian religion. 

But this mysterious dividuity of the good and the 
evil will, the will of the spirit and the will of the 
flesh, must not be carried beyond the terms * good ' 

DONNE. 79 

and * evil.' There can be but one good will — the 
spirit in all ; — and even so, all evil wills are one evil 
will, the devil or evil spuit. But then the One 
exists for us as finite intelligences, necessarily in a 
two-fold relation, universal and particular. The same 
Spirit within us pleads to the Spirit as without us ; 
and in like manner is every evil mind in communion 
with the evil spirit. But, O comfort! the good 
alone is the actual, the evil essentially potential. 
Hence the devil is most appropriately named the 
' tempter,' and the evil hath its essence in the will 
it cannot pass out of it. Deeds are called evil in 
reference to the individual will expressed in them 
but in the great scheme of Providence they are 
only as far as they are good, coerced under the con 
ditions of all true being ; and the devil is the drudge 
of the All-good. 

SERMON IN,— Luke il 29, 30. p. 29. 

Ihid, p. 30. B. 

We shall consider that that preparation, and disposition, 
and acquiescence, which Simeon had in his epiphany, in his 
visible seeing of Christ then, is offered to us in this epiphany, 
in this manifestation and application of Christ in the sacra- 
ment ; and that therefore every penitent, and devout, and 
reverent, and worthy receiver hath had in that holy action 
his Tww ; there are all things accomplished to him ; and his 
for^ for his eyes have seen his salvation ; and so may be content, 
nay glad, to depart vn peace, 

O ! would that Donne, or rather that Luther 
before him, had carried out this just conception to 
its legitimate consequences ; — ^that as the sacrament 
of the Eucharist is the epiphany for as many as 
receive it in faith, so the crucifixion, resurrection, 
and ascension of Christ himself in the flesh, wer^ the 

80 DONNE. 

epiphanies, the sacramental acts and phenomena of 
the Deus patiens, the visible words of the invisible 
Word that was in the beginning, sjnnbols in time and 
historic fact of the redemptive functions, passions, 
and procedures of the Lamb crucified from the 
foundation of the world ; — the incarnation, cross, and 
passion, — in short, the whole life of Christ in the 
flesh, dwelling a man among men, being essential 
and substantive parts of the process, the total of 
which they represented ; and on this account proper 
symbols of the acts and passions of the Christ 
dwelling in man, as the Spirit of truth, and for as 
many as in faith have received him, in Seth and 
Abraham no less eflfectually than in John and Paul ! 
For this is the true definition of a symbol, as dis- 
tinguished from the thing, on the one hand, and 
from a mere metaphor, or conventional exponent of 
a thing, on the other. Had Luther mastered this 
great idea, this master-truth, he would never have 
entangled himself in that most mischievous Sacra- 
mentary controversy, or had to seek a murky hiding- 
hole in the figment of Consubstantiation. 

Ibid, B., C. 

In the first part, then, ♦ * * * More he asks not, less he 
takes not for any man, upon any pretence of any unconditional 

A beautiful paragraph, well worth extracting, ay, 
and reproaching. 

Ibid, p. 34. E. 

When thou comest to this seal of thy peace, the sacrament, 
pray that God will give thee that light that may direct and 
establish thee in necessary and fundamental things ; that is, 
the light of faith to see that the Body and Blood of Christ 

DONNE. 81 

is applied to thee in that action ; but for the manner, how 
the Body and Blood of Christ ii there, wait his leisure, if he 
have not yet manifested that to thee ; grieve not at that, 
wonder not at that, press not for that, for he hath not 
manifested that, not the way, not the manner of his presence 
in the Sacrament to the Church. 

O ! I have ever felt, and for many years thought 
that this rem credimuSt modum nescimtia, is but a 
poor evasion. It seems to me an attempt so to 
admit an irrational proposition as to have the credit 
of denying it, or to separate an irrational proposition 
from its irrationality. I admit 2+^ = 5; how, 
I do not pretend to know, but in some way not in 
contradiction to the multiplication table. To spiritual 
operations the very term ' mode,' is perhaps inap- 
plicable, for these are immediate. To the linking 
of this with that, of A. with Z. by intermedia, the 
term *mocle,' — the question *how?' is properly 
applied. The assimilation of the spirit of a man 
to the Son of God, to God as the Divine Humanity, 
— this spiritual transubstantiation, like every other 
process of operative grace, is necessarily modeless. 
The whole question is concerning the transmutation 
of the sensible elements. Deny this, and to what 
does the modum nescimus refer? We cannot ask 
bow that is done, which we declare not done at all. 
Admit this transmutation, and you necessarily admit 
by implication the Romish dogma, of the separation 
of a sensible thing from the sensible accidents which 
constitute all we ever meant by the thing. To 
rationalise this figment of his church, Bossuet has 
recourse to Spinozism, and dares make God the 
substance and sole ens reale of all body, and by this 
very hypothesis baffles his own end, and does away 
all miracle in the particular instance. 


82 DONNE. 

Ibid, p. 35. B. 

When I pray in my chamber, I build a temple there that 
hour ; and that minute, when I cast out a prayer in the street 
I build a temple there ; and when my soxil prays without 
any voice, my very body is then a temple. 

Good ; but it would be better to regard solitary, 
£amily, and templar devotion as distinctions in sort, 
rather than differences in degree. All three are 


And that more fearful occasion of coming, when they came 
only to elude the law, and proceeding in their treacherous 
and traitorous religion in their heart, and yet communicating 
with us, draw Qod himself into their conspiracies ; and to 
mock us, make a mock of Qod, and his religion too. 

What, then, was their guilt, who by terror and 
legal penalties tempted their fellow Christians to this 
treacherous mockery? Donne should have asked 
himself that question. 

SERMON Y,—Exod, iv. xiii p. 89. 

Ihid. p. 89. G. D. 
It hath been doubted, and disputed, and denied too, that 
this text, my Lord, send I pray thee by the ha/nd of him whom 
thou wiU send, hath any relation to the sending of the Messiah, 
to the coming of Christ, to Christmas day ; yet we forbear 
not to wait upon the ancient Fathers, and as they said, to say, 
that Moses * * at last * * determines all in this, my Lord, 
&0. It is a work, next to the great work of the redemption 
of the whole world, to redeem Israel out of Egypt; and 
therefore do both works at once, put both into one hand, and 
mUte guem mismrus es, send him whom I know thou vnlt send ; 
him, whom, pursuing thine own decree, thou shouldest send ; 
send Christy send him now, to redeem Israel from Egypt 

DONNE. 83 

This is one of the happier accommodations of the 
gnosis, that is, the science of detecting the mysteries 
of fedth in the simplest texts of the Old Testament 
history, to the contempt or neglect of the literal and 
contextual sense. It was, I conceive, in part at 
least, this gnosis, and not knowledge, as our transla- 
tion has it, that St. Paul warns against, and most 
wisely, as puffing up, inflating the heart with self-* 
conceit, and the bead with idle fancies. 

But as a thoughtful man, a pensive, a considerative man, 
that stands still for a while with his eyes fixed upon the 
groimd before his feet, when he casts up his head, hath 
presently, instantly the sun or the heavens for his object ; 
he sees not a tree, nor a house, nor a steeple by the way, but 
as soon as his eye is departed from the earth where it was 
long fixed, the next thing he sees is the sun or the heavens ; 
— so when Moses had fixed himself long upon the con- 
^deration of his own insufficiency for this service, when he 
took his eye from that low piece of groimd, himself, con- 
sidered as he was then, he fell upon no tree, no house, no 
steeple, no such consideration as this^God may endow me, 
improve me, exalt me, enable me, qualify me with faculties 
fit for this service, but his first object was that which pre- 
sented an infallibility with it, Christ Jesus himself, the 
Messias himself, &c. 

Beautifully imagined, and happily applied. 

Ihid. p. 40. B. 

That germm Jehova, as the prophet Esay calls Christ, that 
offspring of Jehova, that bud, that blossom, that fruit of Qod 
himself, the Son of God, the Messiah, the Redeemer, Christ 
Jesus, grows upon every tree in this paradise, the Scripture ; 
for Christ was the occasion before, and is the consummation 
after, of all Scripture, 

84 DONNE. 

If this were meant to the exclusion or neglect of 
the primary sense,— if we are required to believe that 
the sacred writers themselves had such thoughts 
present to their minds, — ^it would, doubtless, throw 
the doors wide open to every variety of folly and 
fanaticism. But it may admit of a safe, sound, and 
profitable use, if we consider the Bible as one work, 
intended by the Holy Spirit for the edification of 
the Church in all ages, and having, as such, all its 
parts synoptically interpreted, the eldest by the 
latest, the last by the first, and the middle by both. 
Moses, or David, or Jeremiah (we might in this view 
afi&rm) meant so and so, according to the context, and 
the light under which, and the immediate or proxi- 
mate purposes for which, he wrote: but we, who 
command the whole scheme of the great dispensa- 
tion, may see a higher and deeper sense, of which 
the literal meaning was a symbol or type ; and this 
we may justifiably call the sense of the spirit. 

lUd, p. 41. R 

So in our liturgy * * we stand up at the profession of the 
creed * * thereby to declare to God and his Church our 
readiness to stand to, and our readiness to proceed in, that 

Another Church might sit down, thereby denoting 
a resolve to abide in this profession. These things 
are indifferent ; but charity, love of peace, and on 
indifferent points to prefer another's liking to our 
own, and to observe an order once established for 
order's sake, — ^these are not indifferent. 

Ibid. p. 42. C. 

This paragraph is excellent. Alas! how pain- 
/ulJj applicable it is to some of our day ! 

DONNE. 85 

Ibid. p. 46. C. 

Howsoever all intend that this is a name that denotes 
essence, being : Being is the name of Gk)d, and of Gk>d only. 

Bather, I should say, ' the eternal antecedent of 
being ; ' I that shall be in that I will to be ; the 
absolute will ; the ground of being ; the self-affirming 
actus purissimus. 

SERMON YL-^Isaiah liiL 1. p. 52. 
A noble sermon in thought and diction. 

Ibid, p. 59. K 

Therefore we have a clearer light than this ; firmiorem pro- 
pketicum 8ermonem, says St. Peter ; toe have a more tv/re toord 
of the propJiets; that is, as St. Augustine reads that place, 
darioremf a more manifest, a more evident, declaration in the 
prophets, than in nature, of the will of God towards man, &c. 

The sense of this text, as explained by the context, 
seems to me this; — that, in consequence of the 
fulfilment of so large a proportion of the oracles, the 
Christian Church has not only the additional light 
given by the teaching and miracles of Christ, but 
even the light vouchsafed to the old Church (the 
prophetic) stronger and clearer. 

Ibid. p. 60. A. 

He spake personally, and he spake aloud, in the declaration 
of miracles ; but gvM credidit omditui PUii f Who believed 
even his report 1 Did they not call his preaching sedition, 
and call his miracles conjuring ] Therefore, we have a clearer, 
that is, a nearer light than the written Qospel, that is, the 

86 DONNE. 

True ; yet he who should now venture to assert 
this truth, or even contend for a co-ordinateness of 
the Church and the Written Word, must bear to be 
thought a semi-Papist, an ultra high-Churchman. 
Still the truth is the trutii. 

SERMON YlL-^John x. 10. p. 62. 

Since the Revolution in 1688 our Church has been 
chilled and starved too generally by preachers and 
reasoners Stoic or Epicurean ; — first, a sort of pagan 
morality was substituted for the righteousness by 
faith, and latterly, prudence or Paleyanism has been 
substituted even for morality. A Christian preacher 
ought to preach Christ alone, and all things in him 
and by him. If he find a dearth in this, if it seem to 
him a circumscription, he does not know Christ, as 
the pleroma, the fullness. It is not possible that 
there should be aught true, or seemly, or beautiful, 
in thought, will, or deed, speculative or practical, 
which may not, and which ought not to, be evolved 
out of Christ and the faith in Christ ; — ^no folly, no 
error, no evil to be exposed, or warred against, which 
may not, and should not, be convicted and denounced 
from its contrariancy and enmity to Christ. To the 
Christian preacher Christ should be in all things, and 
all things in Christ : he should abjure every argument 
that is not a link in the chain, of which Christ is the 
staple and staple ring. 

Ibid. p. 64. 

In this page Donne passes into rhetorical extrava- 
gance, after the manner of too many of the Fathers 
from Tertullian to Bernard. 

DONNE. 87 

Ibid, p. 66. A. 


Some of the later ftathors in the Roman Church * * have 
noted {m aevercU of the Fathers) some inclinations towards 
that opinion, that the devil retaining still his £BMnilty of free 
will, is therefore capable of repentance, and so of benefit by 
this coming of Christ. 

K this be assumed, — ^namely, the free-will of the 
devil, — ^as a consequence would indeed follow his 
capability of repenting, and the possibility that he 
may repent. But then he is no longer what we mean 
hy the devil; be is no longer the evil spirit, but 
simply a wicked soul. 

Ibid. p. 68. C. 

As though Ck>d had said Q^i aum, my name is / am ; yet 
in truth it is Qui ero, my name is / shaU be, 


Nay, I will or shall he in that I will to he. I am 
that only one who is self-originant, causa sui, whose 
will must he contemplated as antecedent in idea to or 
deeper than, his own co-eternal being. But * ante- 
cedent,' * deeper,' &c. are mere vocahuLa impropria^ 
words of accommodation, that may suggest the idea 
to a mind purified from the intrusive phantoms of 
spsice and time, but falsify and extinguish the truth, 
if taken as adequate exponents. 

Ibid. p. 69. a 

We affirm that it is not only as impious and irreligious a 
thing, but as senseless and as absurd a thing, to deny that the 
Son of God hath redeemed the world, as to deny that God 
hath created the world. 

A bold but a true saying. The man who cannot 
see the redemptive agency in the creation has but a 
dim apprehension of the creative power. 

88 DONNE. 

Ihid. D. E. p. 70. A. 

These paragraphs exhibit a noble instance of giving 
importance to the single words of a text, each word 
by itself a pregnant text. Here, too, lies the excel- 
lence, the imitable, but alas ! unimitated, excellence 
of our divines from Elizabeth to William III. 


0, that our clergy did but know and see that their 
tithes and glebes belong to them as officers and 
functionaries of the nationalty, — as clerks, and not 
exclusively as theologians, and not at all as minis- 
ters of the Gospel; — ^but that they are likewise 
ministers of the Church of Christ, and that their 
claims and the powers of that Church are no more 
alienated or affected by their being at the same time 
the established clergy, than they are by the common 
coincidence of being justices of the peace, or heirs to 
an estate, or stock-holders ! * The Romish divines 
placed the Church above the Scriptures ; our present 
divines give it no place at all. 

But Donne and his great contemporaries had not 
yet learnt to be afraid of announcing and enforcing 
the claims of the Church, distinct from, and co- 
ordinate with, the Scriptures. This is one evil con- 
sequence, though most unnecessarily so, of the union 
of the Church of Christ with the national Church, 
and of the claims of the Christian pastor and preacher 
with the legal and constitutional rights and revenues 
of the officers of the national clerisy. Our clergymen 
in thinking of their legal rights, forget those rights 
of theirs which depend on no human law at all. 

* See the author's entire argument upon this subject in the Church 
and State.— JEli. 

DONNE. 89 

Ibid, p. n. A. 

J This is the difference between Gk>d'B mercy and his 
} judgments, that sometimes his judgments may be plural, 

complicated, enwrapped in one another; but his mercies 

are always so, and cannot be otherwise. 

A just sentiment beautifully expressed. 


Whereas the Christian religion is, as Gregory Nazianzen 
says, simplex et nuda, nisipra/ve in artem difficiUimam conr 
verterettw : it is a plain, an easy, a perspicuous truth. 

A religion of ideas, spiritual truths, or truth- 
powers, — not of notions and conceptions, the manu- 
facture of the understanding, — ^is therefore simplex et 
nuda, that is, immediate ; like the clear blue heaven 
of Italy, deep and transparent, an ocean unfathomahle 
in its depth, and yet ground all the way. Still as 
meditation soars upwards, it meets the arched firma- 
ment with all its suspended lamps of light. O, let 
not the simplex et nuda of Gregory be perverted to 
the Socinian, * plain and easy for the meanest under- 
standings ! ' The truth in Christ, like the peace of 
Christ, passeth all understanding. If ever there was 
a mischievous misuse of words, the confusion of the 
terms, ' reason ' and * understanding/ * ideas ' and 
* notions,' or * conceptions,* is most mischievous ; a 
Surinam toad with a swarm of toadlings sprouting 
out of its hack and sides. 

SERMON YJH.— Matt. v. 16. p. 77. 


Either of the names of this day were text enough for a 
sermon, Purification or Candlemas. Join we them together, 
and raise we only this one note from both, that all true 
purification is in the light, &c. 


Tbe illustration of the name of the day contained 
in the first two or three paragraphs of this sermon 
would be censured as quaint by our modem critics. 
Would to heaven we had but even a few preachers 
capable of such quaintnesses ! 

Ihid, D. 

Every good work hath faith for the root ; but every faith 
hath not good works for the fruit thereof 

Faith, that is, fidelity — the fealty of the finite will 
and understanding to the reason, the light that lighteth 
every man that cometh into the worlds as one with, 
and representative of, the absolute will, and to the 
ideas or truths of the pure reason, the supersensuous 
truths, V^hich in relation to the finite will, and as 
meant to determine the will, are moral laws, the 
voice and dictates of the conscience ; — this faith is 
properly a state and disposition of the will, or rather 
of the whole man, the I, or finite will, self-affirmed. 
It is therefore the ground, the root, of which the 
actions, the works, the believings, as acts of the will 
in the understanding, are the trunk and the branches. 
But these must be in the light. The disposition to 
see must have organs, objects, direction, and an 
outward light. The three latter of these our Lord 
gives to his disciples in this blessed sermon on the 
Mount, preparatorily, and, as Donne rightly goes on 
to observe, presupposing faith as the ground and 
root. Indeed the whole of this and the next page 
affords a noble specimen, how a minister of the 
Church of England should preach the doctrine of 
good wDrks, purified from the poison of the practical 
Komish doctrine of works, as the mandioc is eveno- 
mated by fire, and rendered safe, nutritious, a bread 
of life. To Donne's exposition the heroic Solifidian, 

DONNfi. 91 

Martin Luther himself, would have subscribed, hand 
and heart. 

Ibid, p. 78. C. 

And therefore our latter men of the Reformation are not to 
be blamed, who for the most, pursuing St. Cyril's interpreta- 
tion, interpret this universal light tlust ligJUeneth every man to 
be the light of nature. 

The error here, and it is a grievous error, consists 
in the word 'nature.' There is, there can be, no 
light of nature : there may be a light in or upon 
nature ; but this is the light that shineth down into, 
the darkness, that is, the nature, and the darkness 
comprehendeth it not. All ideas, or spiritual truths, 
are supernatural. 

Ibid. p. 79. 

Throughout this page, Donne rather too much 
plays the rhetorician. If the faith worketh the 
works, what is true of the former must be equally 
affirmed of the latter ; — causa causa causa causa ti. 
Besides, he falls into something like a confusion of 
faith with belief, taken as a conviction or assent of 
the judgment. The faith and the righteousness of a 
Christian are both alike his, and not his — ^the faith 
of Christ in him, the righteousness in and for him. 
I am crucijkd with Christ : nevertheless I live ; yet, 
not J, hut Christ liveth in me : and the life which 1 
now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son 
of Gody who loved me, and gave himself for me* 

Donne was a truly great man; but, after all, he 
did not possess that full, steady, deep, and yet com- 
prehensive, insight into the nature of faith and works 
which was vouchsafed to Martin Luther. Donne 

• G&l&t. ii. 20.— ^d. 

92 DONNE. 

had not attained to the reconciling of distinctity with 
unity, — ours, yet God's ; God's, yet ours. 


VeUe et nolle nostrum, est, to assent, or to dis-assent, is our 

Is not this, even with the saving afterwards, too 
nakedly expressed. 


And certainly our works are more ours than our faith is ; 
and man concurs otherwise in the acting and perpetration of 
a good work, than he doth in the reception and admission of 

Why ? Because Donne confounds the act of faith 
with the assent of the fancy and understanding to 
certain words and conceptions. Indeed, with all my 
reverence for Dr. Donne, I must warn against the 
contents of this page, as scarcely tenahle in logic, 
unsound in metaphysics, and unsafe, slippery divinity; 
and principally in that he confounds faith — essentially 
an act, the fundamental work of the Spirit — with 
belief, which is then only good when it is the effect 
and accompaniment of faith. 

Ibid. p. 80. D. 

Because things good in their institution may be depraved 
in their practice — ergone nihil ceremoniwrvm rtidioribus daMtur, 
adjwvandam eorum imperUiam, f 

Some ceremonies may be for the conservation of 
order and civility, or tx) prevent confusion and un- 
seemliness; others are the natural or conventional 
language of our feelings, as bending the knees, or 
bowing the head ; and to neither of these two sorts 

DONKE. 93 

do I object. But as to the adjuvandam rudiorum 
imperitiam, I protest against all such ceremonies, 
and the pretexts for them, in toto. What? Can 
any ceremony be more instructive than the words 
required to explain the ceremony ? I make but two 
exceptions, and those where the truths signified are 
so vital, so momentous, that the very occasion and 
necessity of explaining the sign are of the highest 
spiritual value. Yet, alas ! to what gross and calamitous 
superstitions have not even the visible signs in Baptism 
and the Eucharist given occasion ! 

Ibid, p. 81. E. 

Blessed St. Augustine reports (if that epistle be St Augus- 
tine's), that when himself was writing to St. Hierome, to know 
his opinion of the measure and quality of the joy and glory of 
heaven, suddenly in his chamber there appeared iru^jfabUe 
lumen, says he, an unspeakable, an unexpressible light,* * 
and out of that light issued this voice, Sieronymi anima 
tunif &c 

The grave recital of this ridiculous legend is one 
instance of what I have called the Patristic leaven 
in Donne, who assuredly had no belief himself in the 
authenticity of this letter. But yet it served a 
purpose. As to Master Conradus, just above, who 
could read at night by the light at his fingers' ends, 
he must of course have very recently been shaking 
hands with Lucifer. 

Ibid, p. 83. D. 

Eve's recognition upon the birth of her first son, Cain I 
have gotten, I possess a man from the Lord, ^ 

I have gotten the Jehovah-man^ is, I believe, the 
true rendering and sense of the Hebie^ -^ot^^* 

94 DONNB. 

Eve, full of tbe promise, supposed her first-bom, the 
first-bom on earth, to be the promised deliverer, 

Jlnd, p. 84. D. E. 

SERMON IX.— iZom. adii. 7. p. 86. 

Ibid, p. 90. A. 
That soul that is accustomed, &c. 

Ibid, p. 94. A. R 


SERMON XLL—MaU, v. 2. p. 112. 
Ibid. B. G. D. 

The disposition of our Church divines, under 
James I., to bring back the stream of the Eeforma- 
tion to the channel and within the banks formed in 
the first six centuries of the Church, and their 
alienation from the great patriarchs of Protestantism, 
Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius, and others, who held the 
Fathers of the awtd-Papal Church, with exception of 
Augustine, in light esteem, this disposition betrays 
itself here and in many other parts of Donne. For 
here Donne plays the Jesuit, disguising the truth, 
that even as early as the third century the Church 
had begun to Fsiganize Christianity, under the pre- 
text, and no doubt in the hope, of Christianizing 
Paganism. The mountain would not go to Mahomet, 
and therefore Mahomet went to the mountain. 

Tbid, p. 115. A. 
An excellent passage. 

lUd, p. 117. E. 

And therefore when the prophet says, Quis sapiens, et in- 
tdliget hoc t Who is so vnse as to find ovX this way ? he 

DONNE. 05 

places this cleanness which we inquire after in wisdom. 
What is wisdom ] 

The primitive Church appropriated the name to 
the third hypostasis of the Trinity; hence Sancton 
Sophia hecame the distinctive name of the Holy 
Ghost ; and the temple at Constantinople, dedicated 
hy Justinian to the Holy Ghost, is called the Church 
— alas! now the mosque — of Santa Sophia. Now 
this suggests, or rather implies, a far hotter and more 
precise definition of wisdom than Donne's. The 
distinctive title of the Father, as the Supreme Will, 
is the Good ; that of the only-begotten Word, as the 
Supreme Reason, {Ens Realissimumy *0 12*N, the 
Being) is the True ; and the Spirit proceeding from 
the Good through the True is the Wisdom. Goodness 
in the form of truth is wisdom. Wisdom is the pure 
will, realizing itself intelligently, or the good mani- 
festing itself as the truth, and realized in the act. 
Wisdom, life, love, beauty, the beauty of holiness, 
are all synonyma of the Holy Spirit. — 6 December, 

Ibid. p. 121. A. 

The Arians' opinion, that God the Father only was invisible, 
but the Son * * and the Holy Qhost * * might be seen. 

Here we have an instance, one of many, of the 
inconveniences and contradictions that arise out of 
the assumed contrary essences of body and soul; 
both substances, and independent of each other, yet 
so absolutely diverse as that the one is to be defined 
by the negation of the other. 

SERMON XIII.— /o6 xvi. 17, 18, 19. p. 127. 
Ibid. p. 129. A. B. C. Ibid. pp. 184, 135. 

Truly excellent. 

96 DOKNE. 

SERMON XV.— 1 Cor. xv. 26. p. 144. 
Ibid. D. 

Who, then, is this enemy] an enemy that may thus far 
thmk himself equal to Gbd, that as no man ever saw God, 
and lived ; so no man ever saw this enemy, and lived ; for it 
is death. 

This borders rather too closely on the Irish Fran- 
ciscan's conclusion to his sermon of thanksgiving: 
"Above all, brethren, let us thankfully laud and 
extol God's transcendant mercy in putting death at 
the end of life, and thereby giving us all time for 
repentance ! " Dr. Donne was an eminently witty 
man in a very witty age ; but to the honour of his 
judgment let it be said, that though his great wit 
is evinced in numberless passages, in a few only 
is it shown off. This paragraph is one of those rare 

N.B. Nothing in Scripture, nothing in reason, 
commands or authorises us to assume or suppose 
any bodiless creature. It is the incommunicable 
attribute of God. But all bodies are not flesh, 
nor need we suppose that all bodies are corruptible. 
There are bodies celestial. In the three following 
paragraphs of this sermon, we trace wild fantastic 
positions grounded on the arbitrary notion of man 
as a mixture of heterogeneous components, which 
Des Cartes shortly afterwards carried into its ex- 
tremes. On this doctrine the man is a mere 
phenomenal result, a sort of brandy-sop or toddy- 
punch. It is a doctrine unsanctioned by, and 
indeed inconsistent with, the Scriptures. It is 
not true that body plus soul makes man. Man is 
not the syntheton or composition of body and soul, 
as the two component units. No; man is the unit, 
the prothesis, and body and soul are the two poles, 

DONKE. 97 

the positive and negative, tiie them and antUheM 
of tiie man; even as attraction and repulsion are 
the two poles in and by which one and the same 
magnet manifests itself. 

Ibid, p, 146. a 

For it Is not so great a depopulation to translate a city from 
merchants to husbandmen, from shops to ploughs, as it ia 
from many husbandmen to one shepherd ; and yet that hath 
been often done. 

For example, in the Highlands of Scotland in 
our own day. 

Ibid, p. 148. A. 

The ashes of an oak in the chimney are no epitaph of that 
oak, to tell me how high or how large that was. It tells me 
not what flocks it sheltered while it stood, nor what men it 
hurt when it fell. The dust of great persons' graves is speech- 
less too, it says nothing, it distinguishes nothing. As soon 
the dust of a wretch whom thou wouldst not, as of a prince 
whom thou couldst not, look upon, will trouble thine eyes, 
if the wind blow it thither ; and when a whirlwind hai^ 
blown the dust of the churchyard unto the church, and the 
man sweeps out the dust of the church into the church-yard, 
who will undertake to sift those dusts again, and to pro- 
nounce; — ^this is the patrician, this is the noble, flour, and 
this the yeomanly, this the plebeian, bran.* 

Very beautiful indeed. 

Ibid. p. 149. C. 

But when I lie under the hands of that enemy, that hath 
reserved himself to the last, to my last bed ; then when I 
shall be able to stir no limb in any other measure than a 
fever or a palsy shall shake them ; when everlasting dark- 

• Compare Hamlet, Act Y. Scene 1. This sermon was preached 
March 8, 162&«.— £U. 

vol* I, B. 

98 DONNE. 

ness shall have an iuchoation in the present dimness of nune 
eyes, and the everlasting gnashing in the present chattering 
of my teeth, and the everlasting worm in the present 
gnawing of the agonies of my body and anguishes of my 
mind; when the last enemy shall watch my remediless 
body, and my disconsolate soul there, — ^there, where not the 
physician in his way, perchance not the priest in his, shall 
be able to give any assistance ; and when he hath sported 
himself with my misery, &c 

This is powerful ; but is too much in the style 
of the monkish preachers : Papam redolet. Con- 
trast with this Job's description of death,* and 
St. Paul's sleep in the Lord, 

Ibid. p. 160. A. 

Neither doth Calvin carry those emphatical words which 
are so often cited for a proof of the last resurrection, — thai 
he knows his Redeemer lives, that he hnotos he shall stand the 
last man upon earth, that though his body he destroyed, yet in 
his flesh amd with his eyes shaU he see God — ^to any higher sense 
than so, that how low soever he be brought, to what 
desperate state soever he be reduced in the eyes of the 
world, yet he assures himself of a resurrection, a reparation, 
a restitution to his former bodily health, and worldly fortime 
which he had before. And such a resurrection we all know 
Job had. 

I incline to Calvin's opinion, but am not de- 
cided. After my skin, must be rendered * accord- 
ing to, or as far as my skin is concerned.' Though 
the flies and maggots in my ulcers have destroyed 
my skin, yet still, and in my flesh, I shall see God as 
my Redeemer. Now St. Paul says, that flesh and] 
blood cannot {(rap$ kol at/xa — ov bvvairrat) inherit 
the kingdom of heaven, that is, the spiritual 
world. Besides, how is the passage, as commonly 

* C. Ui. 18, &c.— Etf. 

DONKE* 99 

interpreted, consistent with the numerons ex- 
pressions of doubt and even of despondency in Job s 
speeches ? * 

Ibid, B. C. (SzitkUHs vitUm xxxviL) 

I cannot but think that Dr. Donne, by thus 
antedating the distinct belief of the Jews in the 
resurrection, ** which you all know already," de- 
stroys in great measure the force and sublimity 
of this vision. Besides, it does not seem, in the 
common people at least, to have been much more 
than a mongrel Egyptian-catacomb sort of fsuth, 
or rather superstition. 

In fine. This is one of Donne's least esti- 
mable discourses; the worst sermon on the best 
text Yet what a Donne-like passage is this that 
follows ! 

P. 146. A. 

Let the whole world be in thy consideration as one house ; 
and then consider in that, in the peaceful harmony of 
creatures, in the peaceful succession, and connexion of causes 
and effects, the peace of natura Let this kingdom, where 
God hath blessed thee with a being, be the gallery, the best 
room of that house, and consider in the two walls of that 
gallery, the Church and the state, the peace of a royal and 
religious wisdom. Let thine own family be a cabinet in this 
gallery, and find in all the boxes thereof, in the several 
duties of wife and children, and servants, the peace of virtue, 
and of the father and mother of all virtues, active discretion, 
passive obedience ; and then lastly, let thine own bosom be 
the secret box and reserve in this cabinet, and then the 

* See, however, the author's expressions at, I believe, a rather later 
period. " I now think, after many donbts, that the passage, / know that 
my Redeemer liveth, &c^ may fairly be taken as a burst of determination, 
a quasi prophecy. I know not how this can be ; but in spite of all my 
difficulties this I do know, that I shall be recompensed ! " — Table T<AM^ 
2d edit. p. ^,—Ed. 

100 DONNE. 

galleiy of the best home that can be had, peace with the 
creature, peace in the Churchy peace in the state, peace in 
thy house, peace in thy heart, is a fidr model, and a lovely 
design CTen of the heavenly Jerusalem, which is vino pacts, 
where there is no object but peace. 

SERMON XVI.— /o^n xL 35. p. 163. 

The Masorites (the Masorites are the critics upon the 
Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament) cannot tell us, who 
divided the chapters of the Old Testament into verses: 
neither can any other tell, who did it in the New 

How should the Masorites, when the Hebrew 
Scriptures were not, as far as we know, divided 
into verses at all in their time? The Jews seem 
to have adopted the invention from the Christians, 
who were led to it in the construction of Concordances. 

IbicL p. 154. R 

If they killed Lazarus, had not Christ done enough to let 
them see that he could raise him again ? 

Malice, above all party malice, is indeed a blind 
passion, but one can scarcely conceive the chief 
priests such dolts as to think that Christ could raise 
Lazarus again. Their malice blinded them as to 
the nature of the incident, made them suppose 
a conspiracy between Jesus and the family of 
Lazarus, a mock burial, in short; and this may 
be one, though it is not, I think, the principal 

• How 80 ? Is it not admitted that Robert Stephens first divided the 
New Testament into verses in 1651 i See the testimony to that efTect of 
Henry Stephens, his son, in the Preface to his Concordance.— JSi. 

. * 

DONNE. 101 

rcttson tot this greatest miracle being omitted in 
the other Gospels. 

Ibid, p. 155. B. 

Chrisfc might tngirt himself, and give more scope and 
liberty to his passions than any other man ; both because 
he had no original sin within to drive him, &c. 

How then is he said to have condemned stn 
in the flesh f Without guilt, without actual sin, 
assuredly he was; but iyivero a-dp^, and what 
can we mean by original sin relatively to the 
flesh, but that man is bom with an animal life 
and a material organism that render him tempt- 
ible to evil, and which tends to dispose the life 
of the will to contradict the light of the reason ? 
Did St. Paul by j/xotcS/xari aapKos iLfxaprCas mean 
a deceptive resemblance ? * 


I can see no possible edification that can arise 
from these uZ^m-Scriptural speculations respecting 
our Lord. 

lUd. p. 157* A. 

Though the Gtodhead never departed from the carcase * * 
yet because the human soul was departed from it, he was 
no man. 

Donne was a poor metaphysician ; that is, he never 
closely questioned himself as to the absolute meaning 

* Rom. viii. 8. Mr. C. afterwards ejcpressed himself to the same 
efliBCt : " GhrisfR body, as mere body, or rather carcase (for body is an 
associated wordX was no more capable of sin or righteousness than mine 
or yours; that his humanity had a capacity of sin, follows from its own 
essence. He was of like passions as we, and was tempted. How could 
he be tempted, if he had no formal capacity of being seduced?"— ^o^Ie 
TaUc, 2nd Edit. p. 261.— Ed, 

102 BONNE. 

of his words. What did he mean hy the 'soul?' 
what by the *body?' * 


And I know that there are authors of a middle nature, 
aboye the philosophers, and below the Scriptures, the Apo- 
cryphal books. 

A whimsical instance of the disposition in the mind 
for every pair of opposites to find an intermediate, — 
a mesothem for every thesis and antithesis. Thus 
Scripture may be opposed to philosophy ; and then 
the Apocryphal books will be philosophy relatively to 
Scripture, and Scripture relatively to philosophy. 

Ibid, p. 169. R 

And therefore the same author (Epiphanius) says, that 
because they thought it an uncomely thing for Christ to weep 
for any temporal thing, some men have expimged and 
removed that verse out of St. Luke's Qospel, that /e^iM, tcAen 
he saw that city, uept, f 

This, by the by, rather indiscreetly dets out the 
liberties which the early Christians took with their 

* See Hooker's admirable declaration of the doctrine : — " These na- 
tures, from the moment of their first combination, have been and are for 
ever inseparable. For even when his soul forsook the tabernacle of his 
body, his Deity forsook neither body nor soul. If it had, then could we 
not truly hold either that the person of Christ was buried, or that the 
person of Christ did raise up itself from the dead. For the body sepa- 
rated from the Word can in no true sense be termed the person of Christ; 
nor is it true to say that the Son of God in raising up that body did 
raise up himself, if the body were not both with him and of him even 
during the time it lay in the sepulchre. The like is also to be said of 
the soul, otherwise we are plainly and inevitably Nestorians. The very 
person of Christ, therefore, for ever one and the self-same, was only 
touching bodily substance concluded within the grave, his soul only from 
thence severed, but by personal union his Deity stUl unseparably joined 
with both."— E. P. V. 52. 4.— JSTcdte'a Edit.-^Ed, 

t xix. 41.— JSa. 

DONNE. 103 

sacred writings. Origen, who, in answer to Celsus's 
reproach on this ground, confines the practice to the 
heretics, furnishes proofs of the contrary himself in 
his own comments. 

TWd p. 161. D. 

That world, which finds itself truly in an autumn in itself 
finds itself in a spring in our imaginations. 

Worthy almost of Shakspeare ! 

SERMON XVIL— Matt. xix. 17. p. 163. 

IMd. E. 

The words are part of a dialogue, of a conference, between 
Christ and a man who proposed a question to him ; to whom 
Christ makes an answer by way of another question. Why 
caUest thou me good f &c. In the words, and by occasion of 
them, we consider the text, the context, and the pretext : 
not as three equal parts of the building ; but the context, as 
the situation and prospect of the house ; the pretext, as the 
access and entrance into the house ; and then the text itself, 
as the house itself, as the body of the building : in a word, 
in the text the words ; in the context the occasion of the 
words ; in the pretext the purpose, the disposition of him 
who gave the occasion. 

What a happy example of elegant division of a 
subject ! And so also the compendium of Christianity 
in the preceding paragraph (D). Our great divines 
were not ashamed of the learned discipline to which 
they had submitted their minds under Aristotle and 
Tully, but brought the purified products as sacrificial 
gifts to Christ. They baptised the logic and manly 
rhetoric of ancient Greece. 

Ibid, p. 164. A, B. 
Excellent illustration of fragmentary morality, in. 

104 DONNE. 

vhich each man takes his choice of his virtaes and 


Men perish with whispering sins, nay, with silent sins, sins 
that never tell the conscience they are sins, as often as with 
crying sins. 

Yea, I almost doubt whether the truth here so 
boldly asserted is not of more general necessity for 
ordinary congregations, than the denunciation of the 
large sins that cannot remain in incognito. 

Pnd, p. 165. A. 

Venit prociMrrenSf he came fWMwng, Nicodemus came not 
so, Nicodemus durst not avow his coming, and therefore he 
came creeping, and he came softly, and he came seldom, and 
he came by night. 

Ah ! but we trust in God that he did in fact come. 
The adhesion, the thankMness, the love which arise 
and live after the having come, whether from sponta- 
neous liking, or from a beckoning hope, or from a 
compelling good, are the truest criteria of the man's 


When I have just reason to think my superiors would have 
it thus, this is music to my soul ,* when I hear them say they 
would have it thus, this is rhetoric to my soul \ when I see 
their laws enjoin it to be thus, this is logic to my soul ; but 
when I see them actually, really, clearly, constantly do thus, 
this is a demonstration to my soul, and demonstration is the 
powerfullest proof. The eloquence of inferiors is in words, 
the eloquence of superiors is in action. 

A just representation, I doubt not, of the general 
feeling and principle at the time Donne wrote. Men 
^regarded the gradations of sociely as God's ordinances, 

BONNE. 105 

and had the elevation of a self-approving conscience 
in every feeling and exhibition of respect for those of 
ranks superior to their own. What a contrast with 
the present times ! Is not the last sentence beautiful? 
'* The eloquence of inferiors is in words, the eloquence 
of superiors is in action." 

Ibid, B. and C. 

He came to Christ, he ran to him ; and when he was oome, 
as St. Mark relates it, he fdl vpon his hnees to Chritt, He 
stood not then Pharisaically upon his own legs, his own 
merits, though he had been a diligent obeeryer of the com- 
mandments before, &c. 

All this paragraph is an independent truth ; but I 
doubt whether in his desire to make every particle 
exemplary, to draw some Christian moral from it, 
Donne has not injudiciously attributed, quasi per 
prolepsiny merits inconsistent with the finale of a 
wealthy would-be proselyte. At all events, a more 
natural, and, perhaps, not less instructive interpre- 
tation might be made of the sundry movements of 
this religiously earnest and zealous admirer of Christ, 
and worshipper of Mammon. O, I have myself 
known suchl 


He was no ignorant man, and yet he acknowledged that 
he had somewhat more to learn of Christ than he knew yet. 
Blessed are they that inanimate all their knowledge, consum- 
mate all in Christ Jesus, &c. 

The whole paragraph is pure gold. "Without being 
aware of this passage in Donne, I expressed the same 
conviction, or rather declared the same experience, in 
the Appendix * to the Statesman's Manual. O ! if 

* (G.) which shoald be (B.) " The object of fhe preoeding discotine 
was tP recommend the Bible as the end and centre oC diax imA\q% voiH 

106 DONNE. 

only one day in a week, Christians would consent to 
have the Bible as the only book, and their ministers 
labour to make them find all substantial good of all 
other books in their Bibles ! 


I remember one of the Panegyrics celebrates and magnifies 
one of the Roman emperors for this, that he would marry 
when he was young; that he would so soon confine and 
limit his pleasures, so soon determine his affections in one 

It is surely some proof of the moral efifect which 
Christianity has produced, that in all Protestant conn- 
tries, at least, a writer would be ashamed to assign 
this as a ground of panegyric; as if promiscuous 
intercourse with those of the other sex had been a 
natural good, a privilege, which there was a great 
merit in foregoing ! O ! what do not women owe to 
Christianity ! As Christians only it is that they do, 
or ordinarily can, cease to be things for men, instead 
of co-persons in one spiritual union. 

Ibid, p. 166. A. 

But such is often the corrupt inordinateness of greatness, 
that it only carries them so much beyond other men, but not 
so much nearer to Gbd. 

Like a balloon, away from earth, but not a whit 
nearer the arch of heaven. There is a praiseworthy 
relativeness and life in the morality of our best old 
divines. It is not a cold law in brass or stone ; but 

meditation. I can truly affirm of myself, that my studies have been 
profitable and availing to me only so far, as I have endeavoured to use 
all my other knowledge as a glass enabling me to receive more light in 
1^ wider field of vision from the Word of God."— ^. 

DONNE, 107 

" this I may and should think of my neighbour, this 
of a great man," &g. 

Ibid, p. 167. A. 

Christ was pleased to redeem this man from this error, and 
bring him to know truly what he was, that he was God. 
Christ, therefore, doth not rebuke this man, by any denying 
that he himself was good ; for Christ doth assume that addi- 
tion to himself, I am the good shepherd. Neither doth God 
forbid that those good parts which are in men should be 
celebrated with condign praise. We see that Qod, as soon as 
he saw that anything was good, he said so, he uttered it, he 
declaried it, first of the light, and then of other creatures* 
God would be no author, no example of smothering the due 
praise of good actions. For surely that man hath no zeal to 
goodness in himself, that affords no praise to goodness in 
other men. 

Very fine. But I think another — not, however, a 
different — view might be taken respecting our Lord's 
intention in these words. The young noble, who 
came to him, had many praiseworthy traits of cha* 
racter ; but he failed in the ultimate end and aim. 
What ought only to have been valued by him as 
means, was loved, and had a worth given to it, as an 
end in itself. Our Lord, who knew the hearts of 
men, instantly in the first words applies himself to 
this, and takes the occasion of an ordinary phrase of 
courtesy addressed to himself, to make the young 
man aware of the difference between a mere relative 
good and that which is absolutely good ; that which 
may be called good, when regarded as a mean to 
good, but which must not be mistaken for, or con- 
founded with, that which is good, and itself the end. 

IHd. B.C.D. 

All excellent, and D. most so. Thus, thus our old 
divines showed the depth of their love and ap^recia- 

108 DONNE. 

tion of the Scriptures, and thus led their congriega- 
tions to feel and see the same. Here is Donne s 
authority (Deus non est ens, &c,) for what I have so 
earnestly endeavoured to show, that Detis est ens 
super ens, the ground of all heing, hut therein like- 
wise absolute Being, in that he is the eternal self- 
affinnant, the I Am in that I Am ; and that the key 
of this mystery is given to us in the pure idea of the 
will, as the alone Causa Svi, 

O ! compare this manhood of our Church divinity 
with the feeble dotage of the Paleyan school, the 
' natural * theology, or watchmaking scheme, that 
knows nothing of the maker but what can be proved 
out of the watch, the unknown nominative case of the 
verb impersonal^ — etnaturaest; the * it,* in short, in 
' it rains,' ' it snows,' ' it is cold,' and the like. When, 
after reading the biographies of Walton and his con- 
temporaries, I reflect on the crowded congregations, 
on the thousands, who with intense interest came to 
their hour and two hour long sermons, I cannot but 
doubt the fact of any true progression, moral or 
intellectual, in the mind of the many. The tone, 
the matter, the anticipated sympathies in the ser- 
mons of an age form die best moral criterion of the 
character of that age. 

His name of Jehova we admire with a reverence. 

Say, rather, Jehova, his name. It is not so 
properly a name of God, as God the Name, — God's 
name and God. 

Ti&wi. p. 169. A. 

Land, and money, and honour must be called goods, though 
but of fortune, &c. 

DONNE. 109 

We should distinguish between the conditions of 
our possessing goods and the goods themselves. 
Health, for instance, is ordinarily a condition of that 
working and rejoicing for and in God, which are 
goods in the end, and of themselves. Health, com- 
petent fortune, and the like are good as the negations 
of the preventives of good ; as clear glass is good in 
relation to the light, which it does not exclude. 
Health and ease without the love of God are plate 
glass in the darkness. 

Ihid. p. 170. 

Much of this page consists of play on words ; as, 
that which is useful as rain, and that which is of use 
as rain on a garden after drouth. There is also 
much sophistry in it. Pain is not necessarily an 
ultimate evil. As the mean of ultimate good, it may 
be a relative good ; but surely that which makes pain, 
anguish, heaviness necessary in order to good, must 
be evil. And so the Scripture determines. They 
are the wages of sin ; but God*s infinite mercy raises 
them into sacraments, means of grace. Sin is the 
only absolute evil ; God the only absolute good. But 
as myriads of things are good relatively through par- 
ticipation of God, so are many things evil as the 
fruits of evil. 

What is the apostasy, or fall of spirits? That 
that which from the essential perfection of the 
Absolute Good could not but be possible, that is, have 
a potential being, but never ought to have been actual, 
did nevertheless strive to be actual ? — But this in- 
volved an impossibility; and it actualised only its 
own potentiality. 

What is the consequence of the apostasy ? That 
no philosophy is possible of man and nature but by 
assuming at once a zenith and a nadix, Qodi ^\A 

110 DONNE. 

Hades ; and an ascension from the one through and 
with a condescension from the other; that is, re- 
demption by prevenient and then auxiliary grace. 

Ihid, p. 171. R 

So says St. Augustine, Avdto dicere, though it be boldly 
said, yet I must say it, tUUe esse cadere m aliquod manifestum 
peccattmn, &c 

No doubt^ a sound sense may be forced into these 
words : but why use words, into which a sound sense 
must be forced ? Besides, the subject is too deep and 
too subtle for a sermon. In the two following para- 
graphs, especially, Dr. Donne is too deep, and not 
deep enough. He treads waters, and dangerous 
waters. N.B. The Familists. 

SERMON XYLIL—Acts ii 36. p. 175. 

Ibid. B. 

I would paraphrase, or rather lead the way to this 
text, something as follows : — 

Truth is a common interest; it is every man's 
duty to convey it to his brother, if only it be a truth 
that concerns or may profit him, and he be competent 
to receive it. For we are not bound to say the truth, 
where we know that we cannot convey it, but very 
probably may impart a falsehood instead ; no false- 
hoods being more dangerous than truths misunder- 
stood, nay, the most mischievous errors on record 
having been half-truths taken as the whole. 

But let it be supposed that the matter to be com- 
municated is a fact of general concernment, a tryth of 
deep and universal interest, a momentous truth in- 
volved in a most awe-striking fact, which all responsible 
creatures are competent to understand, and of which 


no man can safely remain in ignorance. Now this is 
the case with the matter on which I am ahout to 
specLk; therefore let all the house of Israel know 
assuredly^ that God hath made that same Jesus, 
whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ ! 

Ibid. p. 176. A. R C. 

True Christian love not only permits, but enjoins, 
courtesy. God himself, says Donne, gave us the 

Jbid. p. 177. A. C. E. 

All excellent, and E. of deeper worth. All that is 
wanting here is to determine the true sense of 
• knowing God,' — that sense in which it is revealed 
that to know God is life everlasting. 

Ibid. p. 178. A. 

Now the universality of this mercy hath God enlarged and 
extended very far, in that he proposes it even to our know- 
ledge ; sciant, let all know it. It is not only credcmt, let all 
believe it ; for the infusing of faith is not in our power ; but 
Gk>d hath put it in our power to satisfy their reason, &c. 

A question is here affirmatively started of highest 
importance and of deepest interest, that is, faith so 
distinguished from reason, credat from sciat, that the 
former is an infused grace * not in our power; ' the 
latter an inherent quality or feiculty, on which we are 
able to calculate as man with man. I know not what 
to say to this. Faith seems to me the coadunation 
of the individual will with the reason, enforcing 
adherence alike of thought, act, and aiSection to the 
Universal Will, whether revealed in the conscience, 
or by the light of reason, however the same may 
contravene, or apparently contradict, the will and 

113 BONNE. 

mind of the flesh, the presumed experience of the 
senses and of the understanding, as the fiaculty, or 
intelligential yet animal instinct, by which we gene- 
ralise the notices of the senses, and substantiate 
their spectra ox phcmomena. In this sense, therefore, 
and in this only, I agree with Donne. No man 
Cometh to Christ unless the Father lead him. The 
corrupt will cannot, without prevenient as well as 
auxiliary grace, be unitively subordinated to the 
reason, and again, without this union of the moral 
will, the reason itself is latent. Nevertheless, I see 
no advantage in not saying the 'will,' or in sub- 
stituting the term * Mth ' for it. But the sad non- 
distinction of the reason and the understanding 
throughout Donne, and the confusion of ideas and 
conceptions under the same term, painfully inturbi- 
dates his theology. Till this distinction of the vov9 
and the ^/)oV77/xa a-apKos be seen, nothing can be 
seen aright. Till this great truth be mastered, and 
with the sight that is insight, other truths may 
casually take possession of the mind, but the mind 
cannot possess' them. If you know not this, you 
know nothing ; for if you know not the diversity of 
reason from the understanding, you know not reason ; 
and reason alone is knowledge. 

All that follows in B. is admirable, worthy of a 
divine of the Church of England, the National and 
the Christian, and indeed proves that Donne was at 
least possessed by the truth which I have always 
laboured to enforce, namely, that faith is the apo- 
theosis of the reason in man, the complement of 
reason, the will in the form of the reason. As the 
basin-water to the fountain shaft, such is will to 
treason in faith. The whole will shapes itself in the 
image of God wherein it had been created, and shoots 
on high toward, and in the glories of, Heaven ! 

PONNE. 113 


If we could have been in Paradise, and seen Gk>d take a 
clod of red earth, and make that wretched clod of con- 
temptible earth such a body as should be fit to receive his 
breath, &c. 

A sort of pun on the Hebrew word Adam or red 
earth, common in Donne's age, but unworthy of 
Donne, who was worthy to have seen deeper into the 
Scriptural sense of tlie 'ground,' the Hades, the 
multeity, the many absque numero et infra numerum, 
that which is below, as God is that which transcends, 

IHd, p. 179. R 

We place in the School, for the most part, the infinite 
merit of Christ Jesus ♦ ♦ rather in pacto than in persima, 
rather that this contract was thus made between the Father 
and the Son, than that whatsoever that person, thus con- 
sisting of God and Man, shoidd do, should, only in respect of 
the person, be of an infinite value and extension to that 
purpose, &c. 

O, this is sad misty divinity ! far too scholastical 
for the pulpit, far too vague and unphilosophic for 
the study. 

IHd. p. 180. A. 

Quis niti infidelis negaverit apvd infei'os fuisse Chinstum f 
says St. Augustine. 

Where?* Pearson expressly asserts and proves 
that the clause was in none of the ancient creeds or 
confessions. And even now the sense of these words, 
He descended into hell, is in no Reformed Church 
determined as an article of faith. 

* Ep. 99. See Pearson, Art. y.—Ed. 

1 ] 4 DONNE. 

Ibid, p. 182. D. 

Audacter dicamy says St. Hierome, cum omnia po88et Deus, 
suscitare virginem post rumam non potest. 

One instance among hundreds of the wantonness 
of phrase and fancy in the Fathers. What did 
Jerome mean? qtiod Deus membranam hymenis 
luniformem reproditcere nequit ? No ; that were too 
ahsurd. What then ? — that God cannot make what 
has heen not to have heen ? Well then, why not say 
that, since that is all you can mean ? 

SERMON XIX.— iZcr. xx. 6. p. 183. 

The exposition of the text in this sermon is a 
lively instance how much excellent good sense a wise 
man, like Donne, can hring forth on a passage which 
he does not understand. For to say that it may 
mean either X, or Y, or Z, is to confess he knows not 
what it means ; hut that if it he X, then, &c. ; if Y, 
then, &c. ; and lastly if it he Z, then, &c. ; that is to 
say, that he understands X, Y, and Z ; hut does not 
understand the text itself. 

BM, p. 185. R 

Seas of blood and yet but brooks, tuns of blood and yet 
but basons, compared with the sacrifices, the sacrifices of the 
blood of men, in the persecutions of the primitive Church. 
For every ox of the Jew, the Christian spent a man ; and for 
every sheep and lamb, a mother and her child, &c. 

Whoo ! Had the other nine so called persecutions 
been equal to the tenth, that of Diocletian, Donne's 
assertion here would be extravagant. 

DONNE. 115 

SERMON XXXrV.— iZom. viiL 16. p. 832. 
nnd. p. 336. A. 
But by what manner comes He from them ? By proceedmg. 

If this mystery be considered as words, or rather 

sounds vibrating on some certain ears, to which the 

belief of the hearers assigned a supernatural cause, 

well and good ! What else can be said ? Such were 

the sounds : what their meaning is, we know not ; 

but such sounds not being in the ordinary course of 

nature, we of course attribute them to something 

extra-natural. But if God made man in his own 

image, therein as in a mirror, misty no doubt at best, 

and now cracked by peculiar and inherited defects — 

yet still our only mirror — to contemplate all we can 

of God, this word * proceeding * may admit of an easy 

sense. For if a man first used it to express as well 

as he could a notion found in himself as man in 

genere, we have to look into ourselves, and there we 

shall find that two facts of vital intelligence may be 

conceived ; the first, a necessary and eternal outgoing 

of intelligence (vovs) from being (to hv)^ with the will 

as an accompaniment, but not from it as a cause, — 

in order, though not necessarily in time, precedent. 

This is true filiation. The second is an act of the 

will and the reason, in their purity strict identities, 

and therefore not begotten or filiated, but proceeding 

from intelligent essence and essential intelligence 

combining in the act, necessarily and coetemally. 

For the coexistence of absolute spontaneity with 

absolute necessity is involved in the very idea of 

God, one of whose intellectual definitions is, the 

synthesis, generative ad extra, et annihilative, etsi 

inclusive, qvioad se, of all conceivable antitheses ; even 

I 2 

116 DONNE. 

as the best moral definition — (and, I how much 
more godlike to us in this state of antithetic intellect 
is the moral beyond the intellectual!) — is, God is 
love. This is to us the high prerogative of the 
moral, that all its dictates immediately reveal the 
truths of intelligence, whereas the strictly intellectual 
only by more distant and cold deductions carries us 
towards the moral. For what is love? Union 
with the desire of Union. God therefore is the 
cohesion and the oneness of all things; and dark 
and dim is that system of ethics, which does 
not take oneness as the root of all virtue. Being, 
Mind, Love in action, are ideas distinguishable 
though not divisible ; but Will is incapable of dis- 
tinction or division : it is equally implied in vital 
action, in essential intelligence, and in effluent love 
or holy action. Now will is the true principle of 
identity, of selfness, even in our common language. 
The will, therefore, being indistinguishably one, but 
the possessive powers triply distinguishable, do per- 
force involve the notion expressed by a Trinity of 
three Persons and one God. There are three Persons 
eternally coexisting, in whom the one Will is totally 
all in each; the truth of which mystery we may 
know in our own minds, but can understand by no 
analogy. For " the wind ministrant to divers at the 
same moment " — thence to aid the fancy — borrows 
or rather steals from the mind the idea of ' total in 
omni parte,' "svhich alone furnishes the analogy; but 
that both it and by it a myriad of other material 
images do enwrap themselves in hoc veste non sua, 
and would be even no objects of conception if they 
did not ; yea, that even the very words, * conception,* 
' comprehension,' and all in all languages that answer 
to them, suppose this trans-impression from the 
mind, is an argument better than all analogy. 

DONNE. 117 

SERMON XXXV.— Mat, xii. 31. p. 341. 

Ibid. p. 842. B. 

first then, for the first term, sin, we use to ask in the 
school, whether any action of man's can have rcUionem 
demeriii ; whether it can be said to offend Qod, or to deserve 
ill of God ? for whatsoever does so, must have some propor- 
tion with Gk>d. 

This appears to me to farnish an interesting 
example of the bad consequences in reasoning, as well 
as in morals, of the cui bono ? cui malo ? system of 
ethics, — that system which places the good and evil 
of actions in their painful or pleasurable effects on 
the sensuous or passive nature of sentient beings, 
not in the will, the pure act itself. For, according 
to this system, God must be either a passible and 
dependent being, — that is, not God,— or else he 
must have no interest, and therefore no motive or 
impulse, to reward virtue or punish vice. The veil 
which the Epicureans threw over their atheism was 
itself an implicit atheism. Nay, the world itself 
could not have existed ; and as it does exist, the 
origin of evil (for if evil means no more than pain in 
genere^ evil has a true being in the order of things) 
is not only a difficulty of impossible solution, but is 
a fact necessarily implying the non-existence of an 
omnipotent and infinite goodness, — that is of God. 
For to say that I believe in a God, but not that he is 
omnipotent, omniscient, and all-good, is as mere a 
contradiction in terms as to say, I believe in a circle, 
but not that all the rays from its centre to its 
circumference are equal. 

I cannot read the profound truth so clearly ex- 
pressed by Donne in the next paragraph — " it does 
not only want that rectitude, but it should have that 

118 DONNE. 

rectitude, and therefore hath a sinful want" — without 
an uneasy wonder at its incongruity with the preceding 

SERMON LXXI.—Mat. iv. 18, 19, 20. p. 717. 

Ibid. p. 726. A. 

But still consider, that they did but leave their nets, they 
did not bum them. And consider, too, that they left but 
nets, those things which might entangle them, and retard 
them in their following of Christ, &c. 

An excellent paragraph, grounded on a mere pun. 
Such was the taste of the age ; and it is an awful joy 
to observe, that not great learning, great wit, great 
talent, not even (as far as without great virtue that 
can be) great genius, were effectual to preserve the 
man from the contagion, but only the deep and wise 
enthusiasm of moral feeling. Compare in this light 
Donne's theological prose even with that of the honest 
Knox ; and, above all, compare Cowley with Milton. 

SERMON LXXU.—McU. iv. 18, 19, 20. p. 726. 
Ibid. p. 727. A.— E. 

It is amusing to see the use which the Christian 
divines make of the very facts in favour of their own 
religion, with which they triumphantly battered that 
of the heathens ; namely, the gross and sinful anthro- 
pomorphitism of their representations of the Deity ; 
and yet the heathen philosophers and priests — Plu- 
tarch for instance — tell ua as plainly as Donne or 
Aquinas can do, that these are only accommodations 
to human modes of conception, — the divine nature 
being in itself impassible ; — ^how otherwise could it 
be the prime agent? 

DONNE. 119 

Paganism needs a true philosophical judge. Con- 
demned it will he, perhaps, more heavily than by the 
present judges, but not from the same statutes nor on 
the same evidence. 

In fine. 

If our old divines, in their homiletic expositions of 
Scripture, wire-drew their text, in the anxiety to 
evolve out of the words the fulness of the meaning 
expressed, implied, or suggested, our modem preachers 
have erred more dangerously in the opposite extreme, 
by making their text a mere theme, or motto, for their 
discourse. Both err in degree ; the old divines, espe- 
cially the Puritans, by excess, — the modem, by defect. 
But there is this difference to the disfavor of the 
latter, that the defect in degree alters the kind. It 
was on God's holy word that our Hookers, Donnes, 
Andrewses preached ; it was Scripture bread that they 
divided, according to the needs and seasons. The 
preacher of our days expounds, or appears to expound, 
his own sentiments and conclusions, and thinks himself 
evangelic enough if he can make the Scripture seem 
in conformity with them. 

Above all, there is something to my mind at once 
elevating and soothing in the idea of an order of 
learned men reading the many works of the wise and 
great, in many languages, for the purpose of making 
one book contain the life and virtue of all others, 
for their brethren's use who have but that one to 
read. What, then, if that one book be such, that the 
increase of learning is shown by more and more 
enabling the mind to find them all in it ! But such, 
according to my experience — ^hard as I am on three- 
score — the Bible is, as far as all moral, spiritual, and 
pmdential, — ^all private, domestic, yea, even political, 
truths and interests are concerned. The astronomer, 

120 FULLER. 

chemist, mineralogist, must go elsewhere; but the 
Bible is the book for the man. 


fi. L c. \x. Life of Eliezen 

He will not truant it now in the afternoon ; but with con- 
venient speed returns to Abraham, who onely was worthy 
of such a servant, who onely was worthy of such a master. 

On my word, Eliezer did his business in an orderly 
and sensible manner, but what there is to call forth 
this hyper-encomiastic, " who only" — I cannot see. 

B. II. c. iii Life of Paracelsus. 

It is matter of regret with me, that Fuller (whose 
wit alike in quantity, quality, and perpetuity, sur- 
passing that of the wittiest in a witty age, robbed 
him of the praise not less due to him for an equal 
superiority in sound, shrewd, good sense, and freedom 
of intellect,) had not looked through the two Latin 
folios of Paracelsus's works. It is not to be doubted 
that a rich and delightful article would have been 
the result. For who, like Fuller, could have brought 
oat and set forth this singular compound of true 
philosophic genius with the morals of a quack and 
the manners of a king of the gypsies ! Nevertheless, 
Paracelsus belonged to bis age — the dawn of experi- 
mental science ; and a well written critique on his 
life and writings would present, through the magni- 
fying-glass of a caricature, the distinguishing features 
of the Helmonts, Kirchers, &c. ; in short, of the host 
of naturalists of the sixteenth century. The period 

FULLER* 121 

might begin with Paracelsus and end with Sir Kenelm 

N.B. The potential {Aoyos OiavOpoairosi) the 
ground of the prophetic, directed the first thinkers 
(the Mystae) to the metallic bodies, as the key of 
all natural science. The then actual blended with 
this instinct all the fancies and fond desires, and 
false perspective of the childhood of intellect. The 
essence was truth, the form was folly ; and this is 
the definition of alchemy. Nevertheless, the very 
terms bear witness to the veracity of the original 
instinct. The world of sensible experience cannot 
be more luminously divided than into the modifying 
powers, TO SAXo, — that which diflPerences, makes this 
other than that ; and the /act aWo — that which is 
beyond, or deeper than the modification. MetaUon 
is strictly the base of the mode ; and such have the 
metals been determined to be by modem chemistry. 
And what are now the general problems of chemistry? 
The difiereuce of the metals themselves, their origin, 
the causes of their locations, of their co-existence in 
the same ore — ^as, for instance, iridium, osmium, 
palladium, rhodium, and iron with platinum. Were 
these problems solved, the results who dare limit ? 
In addition to the mechanique celeste, we might have 
a new department of astronomy, the chymie celeste, 
that is, a philosophic astrology. And to this I do 
not hesitate to refer the whole connection between 
alchemy and astrology, the same divinity in the idea, 
the same childishness in the attempt to realise it. 
Nay, the very invocations of spirits were not without 
a ground of truth. The light was for the greater 
part suffocated, and the rest fantastically refracted, 
but still it was light struggling in the darkness. And 
I am persuaded that to the full triumph of science, 
it will be necessary that nature should be commanded 

1 22 FULLER. 

more spiritually than hitherto, that is, more directly 
in the power of the will. 

B. IV. c. xix. The Prince. 

He sympathizeth with him that by a proxy is corrected 
for his offence. 

See Sir W. Scott's " Fortunes of Nigel." In an 
oriental despotism one would not have been surprised 
at finding such a custom, but in a Christian court, 
and under the light of Protestantism, it is marvel- 
lous. It would be well to ascertain, if possible, the 
earliest date of this contrivance ; whether it existed 
under the Plantagenets, or whether first under the 
Tudors, or lastly, whether it was a precious import 
from Scotland with gentle King Jamie. 

Ibid. c. xxi. The King. 
He is a mortal god. 

Compare the fulsome flattery of these and other 
passages in this volume (though modest to the 
common language of James's priestly courtiers) with 
the loyal but free and manly tone of Fuller's later 
works, towards the close of Charles the First's reign, 
and under the Commonwealth and Protectorate. 
And doubtless this was not peculiar to Fuller : but 
a great and lasting change was effected in the mind 
of the country generally. The bishops and other 
church dignitaries tried for a while to renew the old 
king-godding mumpsimus; but the second Charles 
laughed at them, and they quarrelled with his suc- 
cessor, and hated the hero who delivered them from 
him too thoroughly to have flattered him with any 
unction, even if William's Dutch phlegm had not 
precluded the attempt, by making its failure certain. 

FULLER. 123 

B. V. c. ii. 

God gave magistrates power to punish them, else they bear 
the sword in vain. They may command people to serve God, 
who herein have no cause to complain. 

And elsewhere. The only serious macula in 
Fuller's mind is his uniform support of the right and 
duty of the civil magistrate to punish errors in belief. 
Fuller would, indeed, recommend moderation in the 
practice, but of upas, woorara, and persecution, there 
are no moderate doses possible. 


Part I. c. V. 

Tet there want not learned writers (whom I need not name) 
of the opinion that even the instrumental penmen of the 
Scripture might commit afjAprnfmra fivrifiovuch, though open 
that window to profaneness, and it will be in vain to shut any 
dores : let Gfod he true, cmd every mem a Iyer, 

It has been matter of complaint with hundredsj 
yea, it is an old cuckoo-song of grim saints, that the 
Eeformation came to its close long before it came to 
its completion. But the cause of this imperfection 
has been fully laid open by no party, — scilicet, that 
in divines of both parties of the Reformers, the 
Protestants and the Detestants, there was the same 
relic of the Roman lues, — the habit of deciding for or 
against the orthodoxy of a position, not according to 
its truth and &lsehood, not on grounds of reason 
or of history, but by the imagined consequences of 
the position. The very same principles on which 

124 FULLER. 

the pontifical polemics vindicate the Papal infalli- 
bility, Fuller et centum alii apply to the (if possible) 
still more extravagant notion of the absolute truth 
and divinity of every syllable of the text of the books 
of the Old and New Testament as we have it. 


Sure 1 am, that one of as much meekness as some are of 
moroseness, even upright Moses himself, in his service of the 
essential and increated truth (of higher consequence than the 
historical truth controverted betwixt us) had notwithstanding 
a respect to the reward. — Heb. xi 26. 

In religion, the faith presupposed in the respect, 
and as its condition, gives to the motive a purity and 
an elevation which of itself, and where the recompense 
is looked fDr in temporal and carnal pleasures or 
profits, it would not have. 

# ' B. I. c. v. 

Felagiub. — Let no foreiner insult on the infelicity of our 
land in bearing this monster. 

It raises, or ought to raise, our estimation of 
Fuller^s good sense and the general temperance of 
his mind, when we see the heavy weight of prejudices, 
the universal code of his age, incumbent on his judg- 
ment, and which nevertheless left sanity of opinion, 
the general character of his writings ; this remark 
was suggested by the term *^ monster " attached to 
the worthy Cambrian Pelagius — the teacher Armi- 
nianismi ante Arminium, 

B. IL c. vii. s. 8. 

Whereas in Holy Writ, when the Apostles (and the Papists 
commonly call Augustin the English Apostle, how properly 

FULLER, 125 

we shall see hereafter) went to a foreign nation, Ood gave 
them the language thereof , Ac. 

What a loss that Fuller has not made a reference 
to his authorities for this assertion ! I am sure he 
could have found none in the New Testament, but 
facts that imply, and, in the absence of all such proof, 
prove, the contrary. 

Ibid. 8. 6. 

Thus we see the whole week bescattered with Saxon idols, 
whose pagan gods were the god£sithers of the days, and gave 
them their names. This some zealot may behold aa the object 
of a necessary r^oriMUiony desiring to have the days of the week 
new dipt, a/nd called after other names. Though indeed this 
supposed scandal will not offend the wise, as beneath their 
notice, and cannot offend the ignorant, as above their 

A curious prediction fulfilled a few years after in 
the Quakers, and well worthy of being extracted and 
addressed to the present Friends. Memorandum. — 
It is the error of the Friends, but natural and common 
to almost all sects, — the perversion of the wisdom of 
the first establishers of their sect into their own folly, 
by not distinguishing between the conditionally right 
and the permanently and essentially so. For example. 
It was right conditionally in the Apostles to forbid 
black puddings even to the Gentile Christians, and 
it was wisdom in them ; but to continue the prohibi- 
tion would be folly and Judaism in us. The elder 
Church very sensibly distinguished episcopal from 
apostolic inspiration, the episcopal spirit, — that which 
dictated what was fit and profitable for a particular 
community or Church at a particular period, from the 
apostolic and catholic spirit which dictated truth and 
duties of permanent and universal obligation. 

126 FULLER. 

Ibid, c. viL 

This Latin dedication is remarkably pleasing and 
elegant. Milton in his classical youth, the sera of 
Lycidas, might have written it — only he would have 
given it in Latin verse. 

R X. c. xviL 

Bp. of London. May your Majesty be pleased, that the 
ancient canon may be remembered, Scismatici contra episcopos 
non stmt avdiendi. And there is another decree of a very 
ancient council, that no man should be admitted to speak 
against that whereunto he hath formerly subscribed. 

And as for you, doctor Reynolds, and yoiu* sociates, how 
much are you bound to his Majestie's clemencye, permitting 
you, contrary to the statute primo ElizdbethcBy so freely to 
speak against the liturgie and discipline established. Faine 
would 1 know the end you aime at, and whether you be not 
of Mr. Cartwright's minde, who affirmed, that we ought in 
ceremonies rather to conforme to the Turks than to the 
Papists. I doubt you approve this position, because here 
appearing before his Majesty in Turkey gownes, not in your 
scholastic habits, according to the order of the universities. 

If any man, who like myself hath attentively reiad 
the Church History of the reign of Elizabeth, and 
the conference before, and with, her pedant successor, 
can show me any essential difference between Whit- 
gift and Bancroft during their rule, and Bonner and 
Gardiner in the reign of Mary, I will be thankful to 
him in my heart and for him in my prayers. One 
difference I see, namely, that the former professing 
the New Testament to be their rule and guide, 
and making the fallibility of all Churches and indi- 
viduals an article of faith, were more inconsistent, and 
therefore less excusable, than the Popish persecutors. 
—30 Aug. 1824. 

N.B. The crimes, murderous as they were, were 

FULLER. 127 

the vice and delusion of the age, and it is ignorance 
to lack charity towards the persons, Papist or Pro- 
testant; but the tone, the spirit, characterises and 
belongs to, the individual : for example, the bursting 
spleen of this Bancroft, not so satisfied with this 
precious arbitrator for having pre-condemned his 
opponents, as fierce and surly with him for not 
hanging them up unheard. 

At the end% 

Next to Shakspeare, I am not certain whether 
Thomas Fuller, beyond all other writers, does not 
excite in me the sense and emotion of the mar- 
vellous; the degree in which any given faculty or 
combination of faculties is possessed and manifested, 
so far surpassing what one would have thought 
possible in a single mind, as to give one's adnuration 
the flavour and quality of wonder ! Wit was the stuff 
and substance of Fuller's intellect. It was the 
element, the earthen base, the material which he 
worked in, and this very circumstance has defrauded 
him of his due praise for the practical wisdom of the 
thoughts, for the beauty and variety of the truths, 
into which he shaped the stuff. Fuller was incom- 
parably the most sensible, the least prejudiced, great 
man of an age that boasted a galaxy of great men. 
He was a very voluminous writer, and yet in all his 
numerous volumes on so many different subjects, 
it is scarcely too much to say, that you will hardly 
find a page in which some one sentence out of every 
three does not deserve to be quoted for itself — as 
motto or as maxim. God bless thee, dear old man ! 
may I meet with thee! which is tantamount to — 
may I go to heaven ! — July, 1829. 



There are three^pijn cipal causes to which the 
imperfections and errors in the theological schemes 
and works of our elder divines, the glories of our 
Church, — men of almost unparalleled learning and 
genius, the rich and robust intellects from the reign 
of Elizabeth to the death of Charles II., — may, I 
think, be reasonably attributed. And striking, 
unusually striking, instances of all three abound in a 
this volume ; and in the works of no other divine are/ 
they more worthy of being regretted : for hence haa 
arisen a depreciation of Henry More's theological 
writings, which yet contain more original, enlarged! 
and elevating views of the Christian dispensation 
than I have met with in any other single volume. 
For More had bgth the philosophic and the poetic 
genius, supported by immense erudition. But un- 
fortunately the two did not amalgamate. It was not 
his good fortune to discover, as in the preceding 
generation William Shakspeare discovered, a mor- 
daunt or common base of both, and in which both 
the poetic and the philosophical power blended 
in one. 

These causes are, — 

First, and foremost, — the want of that logical 
irpoiraLbeCa SoKtfxaortfCT), that critique of the human 
intellect, which, previously to the weighing and 
measuring of this or that, begins by assaying the 
weights, measures, and scales themselves ; that fulfil- 
ment of the heaven-descended nosce teipsum, in respect 

♦ Folio. 1708.— jsa. 


to the intellective part of man, which was com- 
menced in a sort of tentative broadcast way by 
Lord Bacon in his Novum Organum, and brought 
to a systematic completion by Immanuel Kant in 
his Kritik der reinen Vemunfty der VrtheUskrafU 
und der metaphysiche Anfcmgsgrunde der Natur- 

From the want of this searching logic, there is 
a perpetual confusion of the subjective with the 
objective in the arguments of our divines, together 
with a childish or anile overrating of human testi- 
mony, and an ignorance in the art of sifting it, which 
necessarily engendered credulity. 

Second, — the ignorance of natural science, their 
physiography scant in fact, and stuffed out with 
fables ; their physiology imbrangled with an inappli- 
cable logic and a misgrowth of entia rationalia, that 
is, substantiated abstractions ; and their physiogony 
a blank or dreams of tradition, and such " intentional 
colours " as occupy space but cannot fill it. Yet if 
Christianity is to be the religion of the world, if 
Christ be that Logos or Word that was in the he- 
ginning , by whom all things became; if it was the 
same Christ who said. Let there he light ; who in and 
by the creation commenced that great redemptive 
process, the history of life which begins in its detach- 
ment from nature, and is to end in its union with 
God; — ifjhis be true, so true must it be that the 
book of nature and the book of revelation, with the 
whole history of man as the intermediate link, must 
be the integral and coherent parts of one great work:_ 
and the" conclusion is, that a scheme of the Christian 
faith which does not arise out of, and shoot its beams 
downward into, the scheme of nature, but stands 
aloof as an insulated afterthought, must be false or 
distorted in all its particulars. In confirmation of 



this position, I may challenge any opponent to 
adduce a single instance in which the now exploded 
falsities of physical science, through all its revolutions 
from the second to the seventeenth century of the 
Christian sera, did not produce some corresponding 
warps in the theological systems and dogmas of the 
several periods. 

The third and last cause, and especially operative 
in the writings of this author, is the presence and 
regnancy of a false and fantastic philosophy, yet shot 
through with refracted light from the not risen but 
rising truth, — a scheme of physics and physiology 
compounded of Cartesian mechanics and empiricism 
(for it was the credulous childhood of experimentalism), 
and a corrupt, mystical, theurgical, pseudo-Platonism, 
which infected the rarest minds under the Stuart 
dynasty. The only not universal belief in witchcraft 
and apparitions, and the vindication of such monster 
follies by such men as Sir M. Hale, Glanville, Baxter, 
Henry More, and a host of others, are melancholy 
proofs of my position. Hence, in the first chapters 
of this volume, the most idle inventions of the 
ancients are sought to be made credible by the most 
fantastic hypotheses and analogies. 

To the man who has habitually contemplated 
Christianity as interesting all rational finite beings, 
as the very spirit of truth, the application of the 
prophecies as so many fortune- tellings and sooth- 
sayings to particular events and persons, must needs 
be felt as childish — ^like faces seen in the moon, or 
the sediments of a teacup. But reverse this, and a 
Pope and a Buonaparte can never be wanting, — the 
molehill becomes an Andes. On the other hand, 
there are few writers whose works could be so easily 
defecated as More's. Mere omission would suffice ; 
and perhaps one half (an unusually large proportion) 


would come forth from the furnace pure gold ; if but 
a fourth, how great a gain ! 



Dedication. Servorum iUiua omnium indiffnissimus. 

Servus indignissimtis, or omnino indigniu, or any 
other positive self-abasement before God, I can 
understand ; but how an express avowal of unworthi- 
ness, comparatively superlative, can consist with the 
Job-like integrity and sincerity of profession especially 
required in a solemn address to Him, to whom all 
hearts are open, this I do not understand in the case 
of such men as Henry More, Jeremy Taylor, Eichard 
Baxter were, and by comparison at least with the 
multitude of evil doers, must have believed themselves 
to be. 

Ibid, V. c. xiv. s. 3. 

This mskkes me not so much wonder at that passage of 
Providence, which allowed so much virtue to the bones of 
the martyr Babylas, once bishop of Antioch, as to stop the 
mouth of Apollo Daphneus when Julian would have enticed 
him to open it by many a fat sacrifice. To say nothing of 
several other memorable miracles that were done by the 
reliques of saints and martyrs in those times. 

Strange lingering of childish credulity in the most 
learned and in many respects enhghtened divines of 
the Protestant episcopal church even to the time of 
James II. ! The Popish controversy at that time 
made a great clearance. 

Ibid. s. 9. 

At one time Professor Eichom had persuaded me 

that the Apocalypse was authentic ; that is, a Danielitic 


132 HBNBT MOB£. 

dramatic poem written by the Apostle and Evangelist 
John, and not merely under his name. But the 
repeated perusal of the vision has sadly unsettled my 
conclusion. The entire absence of all spirituality 
perplexes me, as forming so strong a contrast with 
the Gospel and Epistles of John ; and then the too 
great appearance of an allusion to the fable of Nero's 
return to life and empire, to Simon Magus and 
Apollonius of Tyana on the one hand (that is the 
Eichomian hypothesis), and the insurmountable diffi- 
culties of Joseph Mode and others on to Bicheno and 
Faber on the other. In short, I feel just as both 
Luther and Calvin felt, — ^that is, I know not what to 
make of it, and so leave it alone. 

It is much to be regretted that we have no 
contemporary history of Apollonius, or of the reports 
concerning him, and the popular notions in his own 
time. For from the romance of Philostratus we 
cannot be sure as to the fact of the lies themselves. 
It may be a lie, that there ever was such or such a 
lie in circulation. 

Ibid. c. XV. s. 2. 

Fourthly. The little Jiom, Dan. vii that rules for a time 
and times <md half a tirne, it is evident that it is not Antiochus 
Epiphanes, because this little horn is part of the fourth beast 
— ^namely, the Roman. 

Is it quite clear that the Macedonian was not the 
fourth empire; — 1. the Assyrian; 2. the Median; 
3. the Persian ; 4. the Macedonian ? However, what 
a strange prophecy, that, e confesso having been 
fulfilled, remains as obscure as before ! 


Ibid. B. 6. 

And ye skaXl have ike trUndcUion of ten danfB, — ^that is, the 
utmost extent of tribulation ; beyond which there is nothing 
further, as there is no number beyond ten. 

It means, I think, the very contrary. Decern 
dierum is used even in Terence for a very short 
time.* In the same way we say, a nine days' 

Ihid. C. XVL B. 1. 

But for further conviction of the excellency of Mr. Mede's 
way above that of Grotius^ I shall compare some of their 
main interpretations. 

Hard to say which of the two, Mede's or Grotius', 
is the more improbable. Beyond doubt, however, 
the Cherubim are meant as the scenic omature 
borrowed from the Temple. 

IMd, s. 2. 

That this rider of the white horne is Chiist, they both 
agree in. 

The white horse is, I conceive. Victory or Triumph 
— that is, of the Koman power — followed by Slaughter^ 
Famine, and Pestilence. All this is plain enough. 
The difficulty commences after the writer is deserted 
by his historical facts, that is, after the sacking of 

Ibid. s. 5. 

It would be no easy matter to decide, whether 
Mede 'pltLs More was at a greater distance from 
the meaning, or Grotius from the poetry, of this 
eleventh chapter of the Revelations ; whether Mede 

• Decern dierum viz mihi estfamUia. Heaut. v. i.—Ed. 


was more wild, or Grotius more tame, flat, and 

Ibid, c xvii. s. 8. 

The Old and New Testament, which by a proaopopceui are 
here called the two witnesses. 

Where is the probability of this, so long be- 
fore the existence of the collection since called 
the New Testament ? 

Ibid, VI. c. L s. 2. 

We may draw from this passage (1 Thess, iv. 
16, 17.) the strongest support of the fact of the 
ascension of Christ, or at least of St. Paul's (and 
of course of the first generations of Christians') 
belief of it. For had they not believed his ascent, 
whence could they have derived the universal ex- 
pectation of his descent, — his bodily, personal 
descent? The only scruple is, that sdl these cir- 
cumstances were parts of the Jewish cabala or 
idea of the Messiah by the spiritualists before 
the Christian sera, and therefore taken for granted 
with respect to Jesus as soon as he was admitted 
to be the Messiah. 

Ibid. 8. 6. 

But light-minded men, whose hearts are made dark with 
infidelity, care not what antic distortions they make in in- 
terpreting Scripture, so they bring it to any show of compli- 
ance with their own &ncy and incredulity. 

Why so very harsh a censure? What moral 
or spiritual, or even what physical, difference can 
be inferred from all men's dying, this of one thing, 
that of another, a third, like the martyrs, burnt 


alive, or all in the same way ? Tn any case they 
all die, and all pass to judgment. 

Ibid. c. XV. 

With his semi-Cartesian, semi-Platonic, semi- 
Christian notions, Henry More makes a sad jumble 
in his assertion of chronochorhistorical Christianity. 
One decisive reference to the ascension of the 
visible and tangible Jesus from the surface of 
the earth upward through the clouds, pointed out 
in the writings of St. Paul or in the Gospel, 
beginning as it certainly did, and as in the copy 
according to Mark it now does, with the baptism 
of John, or in the writings of the Apostle John, 
would have been more effective in flooring Old 
Nic of Amsterdam* and his familiars, than volumes 
of such " may he's," " perhapses," and " should be 
rendered," as these. 

Ibid, Vm. c. ii c vi. 

I must confess our Saviour compiled no books, it being a 
piece of pedantry below so noble and divine a person, &c. 

Alas! all this is woefully beneath the dignity 
of Henry More, and shockingly against the majesty 
of the High and Holy One, so very unnecessarily 
compared with Hendrick Nicholas, of Amsterdam, 
mercer ! 

Ibid, X. c. xiii s. 5, 6. 

A new sect naturally attracts to itself a por- 
tion of the madmen of the time, and sets ano- 
ther portion into activity as alarmists and oppugnants, 
I cannot therefore pretend to say what More 

* Hendrick Nicholas and the Family of Love.— Ed. 

136 HENBt MOBE. 

might not have foand in the writings, or heard 
from the mouth of some lunatic who called him- 
self a Quaker. But I do not recollect, in any 
work of an acknowledged Friend, a denial of the 
facts narrated by the Evangelists, as having really 
taken place in the same sense as any other facts 
of history. If they were symbols of spiritual acts 
and processes, as Fox and Penn contended, they 
must have been or happened ; — else how could 
they be symbols ? 

It is too true, however, that the positive creed of 
the Quakers is and ever has been extremely vague 
and misty. The deification of the conscience, under 
the name of the Spirit, seems the main article 
of their faith ; and of the rest they form no 
opinion at all, considering it neither necessary nor 
desirable. I speak of Quakers in general. But 
what a lesson of experience does not this thirteenth 
chapter of so great and good a man as H. More 
afford to us, who know what the Quakers really 
are ! Had the followers of George Fox, or any 
number of them collectively, acknowledged the mad 
notions of this Hendrick Nicholas ? If not 


Part II. ii. c. 2. 
Confutation of Grotins on the 17th chapter of the Apocalypse. 

Has or has not Grotius been overrated ? If 
Grotius applied these words (magnus testis et histori- 
arum diligentissimus inquisitor) to Epiphanius in 
honest earnest, and not ironically, he must have 
been greatly inferior in sound sense and critical tact 
both to Joseph Scaliger and to Rhenferd. Strange, 
that to Henry More, a poet and a man of fine 


imagiDation, it should never have occurred to ask 
himself, whether this scene, Patmos, with which the 
drama commences, was not a part of the poem, and, 
like all other parts, to he interpreted symholically ? 
That the poetic — and I see no reason for douhting the 
real — date of the Apocaljrpse is under Vespasian, is 
so evidently implied in the five kings preceding (for 
Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, were abortive emperors), 
that it seems to me quite lawless to deny it. That 
AaT€Lvos is the meaning of the 666, (c. xiii. 18.) 
and the treasonable character of this, are both shown 
by Irenseus's pretended rejection, and his proposal of 
the perfectly senseless Teitan instead. 


♦ — 

p. 246. 

It seems clear that Irenseus invented the unmean- 
ing Teitan^ in order to save himself from the charge 
of treason, to which the Lateinos might have exposed 
him. See BAhehia passim, 

P. 246. 

Nee magU hlancUri poterit alterum iUud nomen^ Teitan, quod 
stvdioae commendavit Irenamt* 

No ! non studiose, sed ironice commendavit Irenaus. 
Indeed it is ridiculous to suppose that Irenseus was 
in earnest with Teitan. His meaning evidently is : — 
if not Lateinos, which has a meaning, it is some one 

• Gottingen, 1821. The few following notes are, something out of 
order, inserted here in consequence of their connection with the im- 
mediately preceding remarks in the text.— £d. 


of the many names having the same numeral power, 
to which a meaning is to be found by the fulfilment 
of the prophecy. My own conviction is, that the 
whole is an ill-concerted conundrum, the secret of 
which died with the author. The general purpose 
only can be ascertained, namely, some test, partaking 
of religious obligation, of allegiance to the sovereignty 
of the Roman Emperor. 

If I granted for a moment the truth of Heinrichs's 
supposition, namely, that, according to the belief of 
the Apocalypt, the line of the Emperors would cease 
in Titus the seventh or complete number (Galba, 
Otho, and Vitellius, being omitted) by the advent of 
the Messiah ; — if I found my judgment more coerced 
by his arguments than it is, — then I should use this 
book as evidence of the great and early discrepance 
between the Jewish-Christian Church and the Paul- 
ine ; and my present very serious doubts respecting 
the identity of John the Theologian and John the 
Evangelist would become fixed convictions of the 

P. 91. Eev. xvii. 11. 

Among other grounds for doubting this interpre- 
tation (that the eighth in v. 11. is Satan), I object, I. 
that it almost necessitates the substitution of the 
Coptic ayyekos for Syboos against all the MSS., and 
vdthout any Patristic hint. For it seems a play 
with words unworthy the writer, to make Satan, who 
possessed all the seven, himself an eighth, and still 
worse if the eighth : — 2. that it is not only a great 
and causeless inconcinnity in style, but a wanton 
adding of obscurity to the obscure to have, first, so 
carefully distinguished (c. xiii. 1 — 11.) the bpiKtav 
from the two Oripta, and the one OrjpCov from the 
other, and then to make drjpCov the appellative of 


the bpiKdv ; as if having in one place told of Nicho- 
las senior, Dick and another Dick his cousin, I should 
soon after talk of Dick, meaning old Nicholas hy that 
name; that is, having discriminated Nicholas from 
Dick, then to say Dick, meaning Nicholas ! 

Rev. xiz. 9. 

These words might well hear a more recondite 
interpretation ; that is, oUtoi (these hlessed ones) 
are the true Xoyot or rinva 0€ov, as the Logos is 
the vlbs 0€ov, 

Ibid. 10. 

According to the law of symholic poetry, this 
sociahle angel (the Beatrice of the Hebrew Dante) 
ought to be, and I doubt not is, sensu symbolicOy an 
angel : that is, the angel of the Church of Ephesus, 
John the Evangelist, according to the opinion of 

P. 294. Jlev. XX. MiUennvum. 

Die vorzuglichsten Bekenner Jesu 8oUen aufersteheny die 
ubrigen Menscken tollen es nicht, Hiesse jenes, tie sollen noch 
nach ikrem Tode fortvnirJceny so ware das letztere faUch : denn 
auck die ubrigen wurken nach ihrem Tode du/rch ihre schriften, 
ihre Andenken, ihre Beispid, 

Euge ! Heinrichi, 0, the sublime bathos of thy 
prosaism — the muddy eddy of thy logic ! Thou art 
the only man to understand a poet ! 

I have too clearly before me the idea of a poet's 
genius to deem myself other than a very humble 
poet ; but in the very possession of the idea, I know 
myself so far a poet as to feel assured that I can 
understand and interpret a poem in the spirit of 
poetry, and with the poet's spirit. Like the ostrich, 

140 HAOEET. 

I cannot fly, yet have I wings that give me the feeling 
of flight ; and as I sweep along the plain, can look 
up toward the hird of Jove, and can follow him and 
say : — " Sovereign of the air, — ^who descendest on 
thy nest in the cleft of the inaccessihle rock, who 
makest the mountain pinnacle thy perch and halting- 
place, and, scanning with steady eye the orh of glory 
right ahove thee, imprintest thy lordly .talons in the 
stainless snows, that shoot hack and scatter round his 
glittering shafts, — I pay thee homage. Thou art my 
king. I give honour due to the vulture, the falcon, 
and all thy nohle baronage ; and no less to the lowly 
bird, the sky-lark, whom thou permittest to visit thy 
court, and chant her matin song within its cloudy 
curtains ; yea, the linnet, the thrush, the swallow, 
are my brethren : — but still I am a bird, though but 
a bird of the earth. 

" Monarch of our kind, I am a bird, even as thou ; 
land I have shed plumes, which have added beauty to 
the beautiful, and grace to terror, waving over the 
maiden^s brow and on the helmed head of the war- 
chief ; and majesty to grief, drooping o'er the car of 
death 1" 


Ibid. p. 8. 

Yet he would often dispute the necessity of a country 
living for a London minister to retire to in hot summer time, 
out of the sepulchral air of a churchyard, where most of 
them are housed in the city, and found for his own part 
that by Whitsuntide he did rm arthdare, and unless he 
took fresh air in the vacation, he was stopt in his lungs and 
could not speak clear after Michaelmas. 

* By Thomas Plume. FoUo, 1676.— £». 

HACEET. 141 

A plausible reason, certainly, why A. and B. 
should occasionally change posts, but a very weak 
one, methinks, for A.'s having both livings all the 
year through. 

lUd. pp. 42-3. 

The Bishop was an enemy to all separation from the 
Church of England ; but their hypocrisy he thought super- 
lative that allowed the doctrine, and yet would separate for 
mislike of the discipline. ♦ ♦ ♦ And therefore he 
wished that as of old all kings and other Christians subscribed 
to the Conciliary Decrees, so now a law might pass that all 
justices of peace should do so in England, and then they 
would be more careful to pimish the depravers of Church 

The little or no effect of recent experience and 
sufferings still more recent, in curing the mania of 
persecution ! How was it possible that a man like 
Bishop Hacket should not have seen that if separa- 
tion on account of the imposition of things by himself 
admitted to be indifferent, and as such justified, was 
criminal in those who did not think them indifferent, 
— how doubly criminal must the imposition have 
been, and how tenfold criminal the perseverance in 
occasioning separation ; how guilty the imprisoning, 
impoverishing, driving into wildernesses their Christian 
brethren for admitted indifferentials in direct contempt 
of St. Paul's positive command to the contrary ! 


SERMON I.—LuJceiL7. 

Moreover as the woman Mary did bring forth the son who 
bruised the serpent's head, which brought sin into the world 
by the woman Eve, so the Virgin Mary was the occasion of 
grace as the Virgin Eve was the cause of damnation. Eve 

142 HACKET. 

had not known Adam as yet when she was beguiled and 
seduced the man ; so Mary, &c. 

A Rabbinical fable or gloss on Gen. iii. 1. Hacket 
is offensively fond of these worse than sillj vanities. 

Ibid. p. 5. 

The more to illustrate this, you must know that there was 
a twofold root or foundation of the children of Israel for 
their temporal being : Abraham was the root of the people; 
the kingdom was rent from Saul, and therefore David was 
the root of the kingdom ; among all the kings in the pedigree 
none but he hath the name; and Jesse begat David the king, 
and David the king begat Solomon ; and therefore so ofben 
as God did profess to spare the people, though he were angry, 
he says he would do it for Abraham's sake : so often as he 
professeth to spare the kingdom of Judah, he says he would 
do it for his servant David's sake ; so that ratione radicis, as 
Abraham and David are roots of the people and kingdom, 
especially Christ is called the Son of David, the Son of 

A valuable remark, and confirmative of my con- 
victions respecting the conversion of the Jews, 
namely, that whatever was ordained for them as 
Abrahamidm is not repealed by Christianity, but only 
what appertained to the republic, kingdom, or state. 
The modem conversions are, as it seems to me, in 
the face of God's commands. 


I come to the third strange condition of the birth; it was 
without travel, or the pangs of woman, as I will shew you 
out of these words ; fasciis involvit, that she wrapt him in 
swaddling clouts, and laid him in a manger. Ipsa genitrix fuit 
obstetrix, says St. Cyprian. Mary was both the mother and 
the midwife of the child ; far be it from us to think that the 

HACKET. 143 

weak hand of the woman could facilitate the work which was 
guided only by the miraculous hand of God. The Virgin 
conceived our Lord without the lusts of the flesh, and there- 
fore she had not the pangs and travel of woman upon her, 
she brought him forth without the curse of the flesh. These 
be the Fathers* comparisons. As bees draw honey from the 
flower without offending it, as Eve was taken out of Adam's 
side without any grief to him, as a sprig issues out of the 
bark of a tree, as the sparkling light from the brightness of 
the star, such ease was it to Mary to bring forth her first 
bom son; and therefore having no weakness in her body, 
feeling no want of vigour, she did not deliver him to any 
profane hand to be drest, but by a special ability, above all 
that are newly delivered, she wrapt him in swaddling 
clouts. Gravida, sed non gravabatw; she had a burden in 
her womb, before she was delivered, and yet she was not 
burdened for her journey which she took so instantly before 
the time of the child's birth. From Nazareth to Bethlem was 
above forty miles, and yet she suffered it without weariness 
or complaint, for such was the power of the Babe, that rather 
he did support the Mother's weakness than was supported ; 
and as he lighted his Mother's travel by the way from Naza- 
reth to Bethlem that it was not tedious to her tender age, 
so he took away all her dolour and imbecility from her travel 
in child-birth, and therefore she wrapt him in ifwaddling 

A very different paragraph indeed, and quite on 
the cross road to Rome ! It really makes me melan- 
choly ; but it is one of a thousand instances of the 
influence of Patristic learning, by which the Reform- 
ers of the Latin Church were distinguished from the 
renovators of the Christian religion. 

Can we wonder that the strict Protestants were 
jealous of the backsliding of the Arminian prelatical 
clergy and of Laud their leader, when so strict a 
Calvinist as Bishop Racket could trick himself up in 
such fantastic rags and lappets of Popish monkery ! 
— could skewer such frippery patches, cribbed from 

144 HACKET. 

the tyring room of Romish Parthenolatry, on the 
sober gown and cassock of a Reformed and Scriptural 
Church ! 

IMd. p. 7. 

But to say the truth, was he not safer among the beasts 
than he could be elsewhere in all the town of Bethlem 1 His 
enemies perchance would say unto him, as Jael did to Sisera, 
Tiim in, tv/rn m, my Lwdy when she purposed to kill him ; 
as the men of Keilah made a fair shew to give David all 
courteous hospitality, but the issue would prove, if God had 
not blessed him, that they meant to deliver him into the 
hands of Saul that sought his blood. So there was no trust- 
ing of the Bethlemites. Who knows, but that they would 
have prevented Judas, and betrayed him for thirty pieces of 
silver unto Herod % More humanity is to be expected from 
the beasts than from some men, and therefore sh& laid him 
in a manger. 

Did not the life of Archbishop Williams prove 
otherwise, I should have inferred from the Sermons 
that Hficket from his first boyhood had been used to 
make themes, epigrams, copies of verses, and the 
like, on all the Sunday feasts and festivals of the 
Church ; had found abundant nourishment for this 
humour of points, quirks, and quiddities in the study 
of the Fathers and glossers ; and remained a junior 
soph all his life long. I scarcely know what to say : 
on the one hand, there is a triflingness, a showman's 
or relique-hawker*s gossip that stands in offensive 
contrast with the momentous nature of the subject, 
and the dignity of the ministerial office ; as if a 
preacher having chosen the Prophets for his theme 
should entertain his congregation by exhibiting a 
traditional shaving rag of Isaiah's with the Prophet's 
stubble hair on the dried soap-sud. And yet, on the 
other hand, there is an innocency in it, a security of 

HACKET. 145 

fiuth, a fulness evinced iu the plaj and plash of its 
overflowing, that at other times give one the same 
sort of pleasure as the sight of blackherrj bushes and 
children s handkerchief-gardens on the slopes of a 
rampart, the promenade of some peaceful old town, 
that stood the last siege in the Thirty Years* war ! 

SERMON IL—LuJce il 8. 

Tiberius propounded his mind to the senate of Rome, that 
Christ, the great prophet in Jewry, should be had in the same 
honour with the other gods which they worshipped in the 
Capitol. The motion did not please them, says Eusebius ; 
and this was all the fault, because he was a god not of their 
own, but of Tiberius* invention. 

Here, I own, the negative evidence of the silence 
of Seneca and Suetonius — above all, of Tacitus and 
Pliny — outweigh in my mind the positive testimony 
of Eusebius, which rested, I suspect, on the same 
ground with the letters of Pontius Pilate, so boldly 
appealed to by Tertullian.* 

SERMON IlL^Luke ii. 9. 

But our bodies shall revive out of that dust into whicli 
they were dissolved, and live for ever in the resxirrection of 
the righteous. 

I never could satisfy myself as to the continuance 
and catholicity of this strange Egyptian tenet in the 
very face of St. Paul's indignant. Thou fool ! not 
thatt Sc, I have at times almost been tempted to 
conjecture that Paul taught a different doctrine from 

* Ea omnia super Christo PilcUus, et ipse Jam pro sua consciefUia Christi' 
anus, Catsari turn Tiberio nuntiavit. Apologet. ii. 624. See the account 
in Eusebius. Hist. Eccl. il. 2,— Ed. 

VOL. L ^ 

146 ^ HACKET. 

the Palestine disciples on this point, and that the 
Church preferred the sensuous and therefore more 
popular belief of the Evangelists' Kara a-Apna 
to the more intelligible faith of the spiritual 
sage of the other Athens ; for so Tarsus was called. 

And was there no symptom of a commencing 
relapse to the errors of that Church which had 
equalled the traditions of men, yea, the dreams of 
phantasts with the revelations of God, when a chosen 
elder with the law of truth before him, and professing 
to divide and distribute the bread of l^e, could, 
paragraph after paragraph, place such unwholesome 
vanities as these before his flock, without even a hint 
which might apprise them that the gew-gaw comflts 
were not part of the manna from heaven ? All this 
superstitious trash about angels, which the Jews 
learned from the Persian legends, asserted as confi- 
dently as if Hacket had translated it word for word 
from one of the four Gospels ! Salmasius, if I 
mistake not, supposes the original word to have been 
bachelors, young unmarried men. Others interpret 
angels as meaning the bishop and elders of the 
Church. More probably it was a proverbial expres- 
sion derived from the Cherubim in the Temple: 
something as the country folks used to say to 
children. Take care, the Fairies will hear you ! It 
was a common notion among the Jews, in the time of 
St. Paul, that their angels were employed in carrying 
up their prayers to the throne of God. Of course 
they must have been in special attendance in a house 
of prayer. 

After much search and much thought on the 
subject of angels as a diverse kind of finite beings, I 
find no sufficing reason to hold it for a revealed 
doctrine, and if not revealed it is assuredly no truth 
of philosophy, which, as I have elsewhere remarked, 

HACEET. 147 

can conceive but three kinds ; 1. the infinite reason ; 
2. the finite rational ; and 3. the finite irrational — 
that is, God, man, and beast. What indeed, even 
for the vulgar, is or can an archangel be but a man 
mth wings, better or worse than the wingless species 
according as the feathers are white or black? I 
would that the word had been translated instead of 
Anglicised in our English Bible. 

The following paragraph is one of Hacket's sweetest 
passages. It is really a beautiful little hymn. 

By this it appears how suitably a beam of admirable light 
did concur in the angel's message to set out the majesty of 
the Son of Qod : and I beseech you observe, — all you that 
would keep a good Christmas as you ought, — ^that the glory 
of Qod is the best celebration of his Son's nativity ; and all 
your pastimes and mirth (which I disallow not, but rather 
commend in moderate use) must so be managed, without 
riot, without surfeiting, without excessive gaming, without 
pride and vain pomp, in harmlessness, in sobriety, as if the 
glory of the Lord were round about us. Christ was bom to 
save them that were lost; but frequently you abuse his 
nativity with so many vices, such disordered outrages, that 
you make this happy time an occasion for your loss rather 
than for your salvation. Praise him in the congregation of 
the people ! praise him in your inward heart ! praise him 
with the sanctity of your life ! praise him in your charity to 
them that need and are in want ! This is the glory of Qod 
shining round, and the most Christian solenmizing of the 
birth of Jesus. 


As the Temptation is found in the three Gospels 

of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, it must have formed 

part of the Prot-evangelion, or original Gospel ; — 

from the Apostles, therefore, it must have come, and 


148 HACKET. 

from some or all who had heard the account from our 
Lord himself. How, then, are we to understand it ? 
To confute the whims and superstitious nugacities of 
these Sermons, and the hundred other comments 
and interpretations ejusdem farincB, would he a sad 
waste of time. Yet some meaning, and that worthy 
of Christ, it must have had. The struggle with the 
suggestions of the evil principle, first, to force his 
way and compel helief hy a succession of miracles, 
disjoined from moral and spiritual purpose, — miracles 
for miracles' sake ; — second, douhts of his Messianic 
character and divinity, and temptations to try it hy 
some ordeal at the risk of certain death ; — third, to 
interpret his mission, as his countrymen generally did, 
to be one of conquest and royalty; — these perhaps— 
but I am lost in doubt. 


Luke iz. 33. 

I could wish that myself toere accursed from Christ for my brethren, my 
kinsmen according to the flesh. Bom. ix. 3. 

St. Paul does not say, ** I would desire to be 
accursed," nor does he speak of any deliberated 
result of his consideration ; but represents a transient 
passion of his soul, an actual but undetermined 
impulse, — an impulse existing in and for itself in the 
moment of its ebullience, and not completed by an 
act and confirmation of the will, — as a striking proof 
of the exceeding interest which he continued to feel 
in the welfare of his countrymen. His heart so 
swelled with love and compassion for them, that if it 
were possible, if reason and conscience permitted it, 
•'Methinks,* says he, * I could wish that myself were 
accursed, if so they might be saved.' Might not a 
mother, figuring to herself as possible and existing an 

HACKET. 149 

impossible or not existing remedy for a dying child, 
exclaim, * Oh, I could flv to the end of the earth 
to procure it ! * Let it not be irreverent, if I refer 
to the fine passage in Shakspeare — Hotspur's 
rapture-like reverie — so often ridiculed by shallow 
wits. In great passion, the crust opake of present 
and existing weakness and boundedness is, as it were, 
fused and vitrified for the moment, and through the 
transparency the soul, catching a gleam of the infinity 
of the potential in the will of man, reads the future 
for the present. Percy is wrapt in the contempla- 
tion of the phjrsical might inherent in the concentrated 
will ; the inspired Apostle in the sudden sense of the 
depth of its moral strength. 


Thirdly, the necessity of it: far it toas not poasQile that he ahouHd It 
holden of death. 

One great error of textual divines is their inadvert- 
ence to the dates, occasion, object and circumstances, 
at and under which the words were written or spoken. 
Thus the simple assertion of one or two facts 
introductory to the teaching of the Christian religion 
is taken as comprising or constituting the Christian 
religion itself. Hence the disproportionate weight 
laid on the simple fact of the resurrection of Jesus, 
detached from tiie mysteries of the Incarnation and 


St. Austin says, that Tully, in his 3 lib, de BepubUca, 
disputed against the reuniting of soul and body. His argu- 
ment was, To what end? Where should they remain to- 
gether? For a body cannot be assumed into heaven. I 
believe God caused those famous monuments of big wit to 

150 HACKET. 

perish, because of such impious opinions wherewith they 
were farced. 

I believe, however, that these books have recently 
themselves enjoyed a resurrection by the labor of 
Angelo Mai.* 


And let any equal auditor judge if Job were not an Anti- 
Socinian ; Job xiz. 26. Th<mgh c^fter my skin worms destroy 
this body, yet m m^ flesh shall I see Ood, whom I shall behold 
for myself, cmd mime eyes shall see, and not another. 

This text rightly rendered is perhaps nothing to 
the purpose, but may refer to the dire cutaneous 
disease with which Job was afflicted. It may be 
merely an expression of Job's confidence of his being 
justified in the eyes of men, and in this life, f 

In the whole wide range of theological mirabilia, 1 
know none stranger than the general agreement of 
orthodox divines to forget to ask themselves what 
they precisely meant by the word *body.* Our 
Lord's and St. Paul's meaning is evident enough, 
that is, the personality. 


St. Chrysostom's judgment upon it, {having loosed the pains 
of death) is, that when Christ came out of the grave, death 
itself was delivered from pain and anxiety — &Bik« Kar4x<^ 
ahrhv Odvaros, Kid rh 9ewh thrcurx^* Death knew it held him 
captive whom it ought not to have seized upon, and there- 
fore it suffered torments like a woman in travail till it had 
given him up again. Thus he. But the Scripture elsewhere 
testifies, that death was put to sorrow because it had lost its 
sting, rather than released from sorrow by our Saviour's 

* See Jf. T, (Heercnia de S^auHiea qtuB auperaunt. ZeU. Stuttgardt, 
1887.^iBl t See a«pra.— .fia. 

HACKET. 151 

Most noticeable ! See the influence of the sur- 
rounding myriotheism in the dea Mors ! 


Let any competent judge read Hacket*s Life of 
Archbishop Williams, and then these Sermons, and 
80 measure the stultifying, nugifying effect of a blind 
and uncritical study of the Fathers, and the exclusive 
prepossession in favor of their authority in the 
minds of many of our Church dignitaries in the 
reign of Charles I. 


Prudence installed as virtue, instead of being em- 
ployed as one of her indispensable handmaids, and 
the products of this exemplified and illustrated in the 
Life of Archbishop Williams, as a work, I could 
warmly recommend to my dearest Hartley. Williams 
was a man bred up to the determination of being 
righteous, both honorably striving and selfishly am- 
bitious, but all within the bounds and permission of 
the law, the reigning system of casuistry ; in short, 
an egotist in morals, and a worldling in impulses and 
motives. And yet by pride and by innate nobleness 
of nature munificent and benevolent, with all the 
negative virtues of temperance, chastity, and the like, 
— take this man on his road to his own worldly 
aggrandisement. Winding his way through a grove 
of powerful rogues, by flattery, professions of devoted 
attachment, and by actual and zealous as well as able 
services, and at length becoming in fact nearly as 
great a knave as the knaves (Duke of Buckingham 
for example) whose favor and support he had been 

* Folio, 1693.— JEa. 

152 HACKET. 

conciliating, — till at last in some dilemma, some strait 
between conscience and fear, and increased confidence 
in his own political strength, he opposes or hesitates 
to further some too foolish or wicked project of his 
patron knave, or affronts his pride by counselling a 
different course (not a less wicked, but one more profit- 
able and conducive to his Grace's elevation) ; and then 
is floored or crushed by him, and falls unknown and 
unpitied. Such was that truly wonderful scholar and 
statesman. Archbishop Williams. 

Part I. 8. 61. 

'And God forbid that any other course should be 
attempted. For this liberty was settled on the subject, with 
such imprecations upon the infringers, that if they should 
remove these great landmarks, they must look for vengeance, 
as if entailed by public vows on them and their posterity.' 
These were the Dean's instructions, &c. 

He deserves great credit for them. They put him 
in strong contrast with Laud. 

Ibid. s. 80. 

Thus for them both together he solicits : — ^My most noble 
lord, what true applause and admiration the King and your 
Honor have gained, &c. 

All this we, in the year 1883, should call abject 
and base ; but was it so in Bishop Williams ? In the 
history of the morality of a people, prudence, yea 
cunning, is the earliest form of virtue. This is 
expressed in Jacob, and in Ulysses and all the most 
ancient fables. It will require the true philosophic 
calm and serenity to distinguish and appreciate the 
character of the morality of our great men from 
Henry VIII. to the close of James I., — nullum numen 

HACKET. 153 

ahest, si sit prudentia, — and of those of Charles I. to 
the Restoration. The difference almost amounts to 

IHd, 8. 81, 82. 

How is it that any deeply-read historian should not 
see how imperfect and precarious the righto of per- 
sonal liberty were during this period ; or, seeing it, 
refuse to do justice to the patriote under Charles I. ? 
The truth is, that from the reign of Edward I. (to go 
no farther backward), there was a spirit of freedom in 
the people at large, which all our kings in their senses 
were cautious not to awaken by too rudely treading 
on it ; but for individuals, as such, there was none 
till the conflict with the Stuarto. 

Ibid. B. Si. 

Of such a conclusion of state, qua: ailiqucmdo incognita, 
semper justa, &c. 

This perversion of words respecting the decrees of 
Providence to the caprices of James and his beslob- 
bered minion the Duke of Buckingham, is somewhat 
nearer to blasphemy than even the euphuism of the 
age can excuse. 

Ibid, s. 85. 
tims, Jacobe, quod optas 

Explorare Uibor, mihi jttssa capeuere faa est 

In our times this would be pedantic wit : in the 
days of James I., and in the mouth of Archbishop 
Williams, it was witty pedantry. 

lUd, s. 89. 
He that doth much in a short life products his mortality. 

154 HACKET. 

* Products* for * produces ;* that is, lengthens out, 
ut apud geometros. But why Hacket did not say 
* prolongs,* I know not. 


See what a globe of light there is in natural reason, which 
is the same in every man : but when it takes well, and riseth 
to perfection, it is called wisdom in a few. 

The good affirming itself — (the will, I am) — beget- 
teth the true, and wisdom is the spirit proceeding. 
But in the popular acceptation, common sense in an 
uncommon degree is what the world calls wisdom. 

lUd. 8. 92. 

A well-spirited clause, and agreeable to holy assurance, 
that truth is more like to win than love. Could the light 
of such a Qospel as we profess be eclipsed with the inter- 
position of a single marriage ? 

And yet Hacket must have lived to see the prac- 
tical confutation of this shallow Gnathonism in the 
result of the marriage with the Papist Henrietta of 
France ! 

Ibid. 8. 96. 

** Floud," says the Lord Keeper, " since I am no Bishop in 
your opinion, I will be no Bishop to you." 

I see the wit of this speech ; but the wisdom, the 
Christianity, the beseemingness of it in a Judge and 
a Bishop, — what am I to say of that ? 


And after the period of his presidency (of the Star Cham- 
ber), it is too well known how far the enhancements were 

HACKET. 155 

stretched. JBut the wringing of the note hringeiK forth Uood, 
Prov 30—33. 

We may learn from this and fifty other passages, 
that it did not require the factious prejudices of 
Prynne or Burton to look with aversion on the pro- 
ceedings of Laud. Bishop Hacket was as hot a 
royalist as a loyal Englishman could he, yet Laud was 
aUii nimis. 

lUd, 8. 97. 

New stars have appeared and vamshed : the ancient aste- 
risms remain ; there's not an old star missing. 

If they had been, they would not have been old. 
This therefore, like many of Lord Bacon's illus- 
trations, has more wit than meaning. But it is a 
good trick of rhetoric. The vividness of the image, 
per se, makes men overlook the imperfection of the 
simile. * You see my hand, the hand of a poor, 
puny fellow-mortal ; and will you pretend not to see 
the hand of Providence in this business ? He who 
sees a mouse must be wilfully blind if he does not 
see an elephant ! ' 

Ibid. s. 100. 

The error of the first James, — an ever well- 
intending, well-resolving, but, alas! ill-performing 
monarch, a kind-hearted, affectionate, and fondling 
old man, really and extensively learned, yea, and as 
fer as quick wit and a shrewd judgment go to the 
making up of wisdom, wise in his generation, and a 
pedant by the right of pedantry, conceded at that 
time to all men of learning (Bacon for example), — 
his error, I say, consisted in the notion, that because 
the stalk and foliage were originally contained in the 

156 HACKET. 

seed, and were derived from it, therefore they remained 
so in point of right after their evolution. The kingly 
power was the seed ; the House of Commons and the 
municipal charters and privileges the stock of foliage ; 
the unity of the realm, or what we mean hy the Con- 
stitution, is the root. Meanwhile the seed is gone, 
and reappears as the crown and glorious flower of the 
plant. But James, in my honest judgment, was an 
angel compared with his son and grandsons. As 
Williams to Laud, so James I. was to Charles I. 

Restraint is not a medicine to cure epidemical diseases. 

A most judicious remark. 

Ibid, s. 103. 

The least connivance in the world towards the person of a 

It is clear to us that this illegal or prater-legsl and 
desultory toleration hy connivance at particular cases, 
— this precarious depending on the momentary mood 
of the King, and this in a stretch of a questioned pre- 
rogative, — could neither satisfy nor conciliate the 
Eoman Catholic potentates ahroad, hut was sure to 
offend and alarm the Protestants at home. Yet on 
the other hand, it is unfair as well as unwise to cen- 
sure the men of an age for want of that which was 
above their age. The true principle, much more the 
practicable rules, of toleration, were in James's time 
obscure to the wisest ; but by the many, laity no less 
than clergy, would have been denounced as soul- 
murder and disguised atheism. In fact — and a 
melancholj fact it is, — ^toleration then first becomes 
frictioiJde, when indifference has deprived it of all 

HACKET. 167 

merit. In the same spirit I excuse the opposite 
party, the Puritans and Papaphobists. 

Ibid, 8. 104. 

It was scarcely to be expected that the passions of 
James's age would allow of this wise distinction 
between Papists, the intriguing restless partisans of a 
foreign potentate, and simple Eoman-Catholics, who 
preferred the mumpsimus of their grandsires to the 
corrected sumpsimus of the Keformation. But that 
in our age this distinction should have been neglected 
in the Eoman-Catholic Emancipation Bill ! 

Ibid. 8. 105. 

But this invisible consistory shall be confusedly difFused 
over all the kingdom, that many of the subjects shall, to the 
intolerable exhausting of the wealth of the realm, pay double 
tithes, double offerings, double fees, in regard of their double 
consistory. And if Ireland be so poor as it is suggested, I 
hold, under correction, that this invisible consistory is the 
principal cause of the exhausting thereof. 

A memorable remark on the evil of the double 
priesthood in Ireland. 


Dr. Bishop, the new Bishop of Chalcedon, is to come to 
London privately, and I am much troubled at it, not 
knowing what to advise his majesty as things stand at this 
present. If you were shipped with the Infanta, the only 
counsel were to let the judges proceed with him presently; 
hang him out of the way, and the King to blame my lord of 
Canterbury or myself for it. 

Striking instance and illustration of the tricksy 
policy which in the seventeenth century passed for 

158 HACEET. 

state wisdom even with the comparativelj wise. Bat 
there must be a Ulysses before there can be an 
Aris tides and Phocion. 

Poor King James's main errors arose out of his 
superstitious notions of a sovereignty inherent in the 
person of the king. Hence he would be a sacred 
person, though in all other respects he might be a 
very devil. Hence his yearning for the Spanish 
match ; and the ill effects of his toleration became 
rightly attributed by his subjects to foreign influence, 
as being against his own acknowledged principle, not 
on a principle. 

Ibid, s. 107. 

I have at times played with the thought, that our 
bishoprics, like most of our college fellowships, 
might advantageously be confined to single men, if 
only it were openly declared to be on ground of 
public expediency, and on no supposed moral supe- 
riority of the single state. 

Ibid. s. 108. 

That a rector or vicar had not only an office in the church, 
but a freehold for life, by the common law, in his benefice. 

I if Archbishop Williams had but seen in a clear 
point of view what he indistinctly aims at, — the 
essential distinction between the nationalty and its 
trustees and holders, and the Christian Church and 
its ministers.* 

Ibid, s. 111. 

1 will represent him (the archbishop of Spalatro), in a line 
or two, that he was as indifferent, or rather dissolute, in 

* See The Chorch and State,— £d. 

HACKET. 159 

pracidce as in opinion. For in the same chapter, art. 35, this 
is his Nicolaitan doctrine : — A plurcUitaU uxorum nattara 
hwma/na non abhorret, imo fortaate neque ab ea/rttm communitate. 

How SO ? The words mean only that the human 
animal is not withholden bj any natural instinct 
from plurality or even community of females. It 
is not asserted, that reason and revelation do not 
forbid both the one and the other, or that man 
unwithholden would not be a Yahoo, morally inferior 
to the swallow. The emphasis is to be laid on 
natura^ not on humana. Humanity forbids plural 
and promiscuous intercourse, not however by the 
animal nature of man, but by the reason and religion 
that constitute his moral and spiritual nature. 

IMd, 8. 112. 

But being thrown out into banishment, and himted to be 
destroyed as a partridge in the mountain, he subscribed against 
his own hand, which yet did not prejudice Athanasius his 
innocency: — tA 7^ iK ^erdywv trof^ r^v i^ ^XVS yytafiriy 
ytyvSfieyoy raSra oZ rS>v i^^BhrrnVy kKKh. rSav ficurayi^Sm-wv 
iarl fiovXiifMra. 

I have ever said this of Sir John Cheke. I regret 
his recantation as one of the cruelties suffered by 
him, and always see the guilt flying off from him 
and settling on his persecutors. 

Ibid, s. 151. 

1 conclude, therefore, that his Highness having admitted 
nothing in these oaths or articles, either to the prejudice of 
the true, or the equalizing or authorizing of the other, re- 
ligion, but contained himself wholly within the limits of 
penal statutes and connivances, wherein the state hath ever 
challenged and usurped a directing power, &c. 

Three points seem wanting to render the Lord 

1 60 HACKET. 

Keeper's argument air-tight; — 1. The proof that a 
King of England even then had a right to dispense, 
not with the execution in individual cases of the 
laws, but with the laws themselves in omne futurum ; 
that is, to repeal laws by his own act ; — 2. The 
proof that such a tooth-and-talon drawing of the 
laws did not endanger the equalising and final 
mastery of the unlawful religion ; — 3. The utter 
want of all reciprocity on the part of the Spanish 
monarch. In short, it is pardonable in Racket, 
but would be contemptible in any other person, not 
to see this advice of the Lord Keeper's as a black 
blotch in his character, both as a Protestant Bishop 
and as a councillor of state in a free and Protestant 

Ibid, 8. 152. 

Yet opinions were so various, that some spread it for a 
fame, that, &c. 

Was it not required of — at all events usual for 
— all present at a Council to subscribe their names 
to the act of the majority? There is a modern 
case in point, I think, that of Sir Arthur Wellesley's 
signature to the Convention of Cintra. 

Ibid, s. 164. 

For to forbid judges against their oath, and justices of 
peace (sworn likewise), not to execute the law of the land, 
is a thing unprecedented in this kingdom. Dwus sermo, a 
harsh and bitter pill to be digested upon a sudden, and 
without some preparation. 

What a fine India-rubber conscience. Hacket, as 
well as his patron, must have had ! * Policy with 
innocency,* * cunning with conscience,' lead up the 
dance to the tune of ' Tantara rogues all 1 * 

HACKET. 161 

Upon mj word, I can scarcely conceive a greater 
difficulty than for an honest, warm-hearted man of 
principle of the present day so to discipline his mind 
by reflection on the circumstances and received moral 
system of the Stuarts* age (from Elizabeth to the 
death of Charles I.), and its proper place in the 
spiral line of ascension, as to be able to regard the 
Duke of Buckingham as not a villain, and to resolve 
many of the acts of those Princes into passions, con- 
science-warped and hardened by half-truths and the 
secular creed of prudence, as being itself virtue 
instead of one of her handmaids, when interpreted 
by minds constitutionally and by their accidental 
circumstances imprudent and rash, yet fearful and 
suspicious ; and with casuists and codes of casuistry 
as their conscience-leaders ! One of the favourite 
works of Charles I. was Sanderson de Juramento, 

Ibid. B. 200. 

Wherefore he waives the strong and full defence he had 
made upon stopping of an original writ, and deprecates all 
offence by that maxim of the law which admits of a mischief 
rather than an inconvenience : which was as much as to say, 
that he thought it a far less evil to do the lady the probability 
of an injury (in her own name) than to suffer those two courts 
to clash together again. 

All this is a tangle of sophisms. The assumption 
is, it is better to inflict a private wrong than a public 
one : we ought to wrong one rather than many. But 
even then, it is badly stated. The principle is true 
only where the tolerating of the private wrong is the 
only means of preventing a greater public wrong. 
But in this case it was the certainty of the wrong of 
one to avoid the chance of an inconvenience that 
might perchance be the occasion of wrong to many, 

VOL. I. M 

162 HACKET. 

and which inconyenience both easily might and 
should have been remedied by rightful measures, by 
mutual agreement between the Bishop and Chan- 
cellor, and by the King, or by an act of Parliament. 

Ibid, 8. 203. 

' Truly, Sir, this is my dark lantern, and I am not ashamed 
to inquire of a Dalilah to resolve a riddle ; for in my studies 
of divinity I have gleaned up this maxim, licei uti cUieno pec- 
ccUo; — ^though the Devil make her a sinner, I may make 
good use of her sin/ Prinqe, merrily, ' Do you deal in such 
ware?' 'In good faith, Sir,' says the Keeper, 'I never saw 
her face.' 

And Hacket's evident admiration, and not merely 
approbation, of this base Jesuitry, — this divinity 
which had taught the Archbishop licere uti alieno 
peccato ! But Charles himself was a student of such 
divinity, and yet (as rogues of higher rank comfort 
the pride of their conscience by despising inferior 
knaves) I suspect that the " merrily " was the Sar- 
donic mirth of bitter contempt; only, however, 
because he disliked Williams, who was simply a man 
of his age, his baseness being for us, not for his 
contemporaries, or even for his own mind. But the 
worst of all is the Archbishop's heartless disingen- 
uousness and moon-like nodes towards his kind old 
master the King. How much of truth was there 
in the Spaniard's information respecting the intrigues 
of the Prince and the Duke of Buckingham? If 
none, if they were mere slanders, if the Prince had 
acted the filial part toward his father and King, and 
the Duke the faithful part towards his master and 
only too fond and affectionate benefactor, what more 
was needed than to expose the Msehoods ? But if 
Williaiiis knew that there was too great a mixture 

HACKET. 163 

of truth in the charges, what a cowardly ingrate to 
his old friend to have thus curried favor with the 
rising sun hy this base jugglery ! 

Ibid. s. 209. 

He was the topsail of the nobility, and in power and trust 
of offices far above all the nobility. 

James I. was no fool, and though through weak- 
ness of character an unwise master, yet not an 
unthinking statesman; and I still want a satis- 
factory solution of the accumulation of offices on 

Ibid. s. 212. 

Prudent men will continue the oblations of their fore- 
fiithers* piety. 

The danger and mischief of going far hack, and 
yet not half far enough! Thus Hacket refers to 
the piety of individuals our forefathers as the origin 
of Church property. Had he gone further back, and 
traced to the source, he would have found these 
partial benefactions to have been mere restitutions 
of rights co-original with their own property, and as a 
national reserve for the purposes of national existence 
— the condition sine qua non of the equity of their 
proprieties ; for without civilisation a people cannot 
be, or continue to be, a nation. But, alas ! the 
ignorance of the essential distinction of a national 
clerisy, the Ecclesia, from the Christian Church. 
The Ecclesia has been an eclipse to the intellect of 
both Churchmen and Sectarians, even from Elizabeth 
to the present day, 1833. 

Ibid. s. 214. 

And being threatened, his best mitigation was, that perhaps 

M 2 

164 HACKET. 

it was not safe for him to deny so g^eat a lord; yet it was safest 
for his lordship to be denied. ♦ * * The King heard the 
noise of these crashes, aud was so pleased, that he thanked 
Ood, before many witnesses, that he had put the Keeper into 
that place : ' For/ says he, 'he that will not wrest justice for 
Buckingham's sake, whom I know he loves, wUl never be 
corrupted with money, which he never loved/ 

Strange it must seem to us ; yet it is evident that 
Hacket thought it necessary to make a mid some- 
thing, half apology and half eulogy, for the Lord 
Keeper's timid half resistance to the insolence and 
iniquitous interference of the minion Duke. What a 
portrait of the times ! But the dotage of the King 
in the maintenance of the man, whose insolence in 
wresting justice he himself admits ! Yet how many 
points, both of the times and of the King's personal 
character, must be brought together before we can 
fairly solve the intensity of James's minionism, his 
kingly egotism, his weak kindheartedness, his vulgar 
coarseness of temper, his systematic jealousy of the 
ancient nobles, his timidity, and the like I 


* Sir,' says the Lord Keeper, ' will you be pleased to listen 
to me, taking in the Prince's consent, of which I make no 
doubt, and I will shew how you shall furnish the second 
and third brothers with preferments sufficient to maintain 
them, that shall cost you nothing. * * * If they fall to 
their studies, design them to the bishoprics of Durham and 
Winchester, when they become void. If that happen in their 
nonage, which is probable, appoint commendatories to dis- 
charge the duty for them for a laudable allowance, but 
gathering the fruits for the support of your grandchildren, 
till they come to virility to be consecrated,' &c. 

Williams could not have been in earnest in this 
viUanoos counsel, but he knew his man. This con- 

HACEET. 165 

celt of dignifying dignities by the Simoniacal prosti- 
tution of them to blood-royal was just suited to James's 

Part II. 8. 74. 

* * To yield not only pasBiye obedience (which is due) 
but active also, &c. 

* Which is due.* What in the name of common 
sense can this mean, that is, speculatively ? Prac- 
tically, the meaning is clear enough, namely, that 
we should do what we can to escape hanging ; but 
the distinction is for decorum, and so let it pass. 

Ibid. 8. 76. 

This is the venom of this new doctrine, that by making us 
the King's creatures, and in the state of minors or children, 
to take away all our property ; which would leave us nothing 
of our own, and lead us (but that God hath given us just and 
gracious Princes) into slavery. 

And yet this just and gracious Prince prompts, 
sanctions, supports, and openly rewards this en- 
venomer, in flat contempt of both Houses of 
Parliament, — protects and prefers him and others of 
the same principles and professions on account of 
these professions ! And the Parliament and nation 
were inexcusable, forsooth, in not trusting to Charles's 
assurances, or rather the assurances put in his mouth 
by Hyde, Falkland, and others, that he had always 
abhorred these principles. 

Ibid. s. 136. 

When they saw he was not seyish (it is a word of their own 
new mint), &c. 

Singular ! From this passage it would seem that 

166 HACKET. 

our 80 very common word * selfish * is no older than 
the latter part of the reign of Charles I. 

Ibid. 8. 137. 

Their political aphorisms are far more dangerous, that His 
Majesty is not the highest power in his realms; that he hath 
not absolute sovereignty ; and that a Parliament sitting is 
co-ordinate with him in it. 

Hacket himself repeatedly implies as much ; for 
would he deny that the King with the Lords and 
Commons is not more than the King without them ? 
or that an act of Parliament is not more than a 
proclamation ? 

Ibid. s. 164. 

What a venomous spirit is in that serpent Milton, that 
black-mouthed Zoilus, that blows his viper's breath upon 
those immortal devotions from the beginning to the end ! 
This is he that wrote with all irreverence against the Fathers 
of our Church, and showed as little duty to the father that 
begat him : the same that wrote for the Pharisees, that it 
was lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause, — 
and against Christ, for not allowing divorces : the same, 
horrid ! that defended the lawfulness of the greatest crime 
that ever was committed, to put our thrice-excellent King to 
death : a petty schoolboy scribbler, that durst grapple in 
such a cause with the prince of the learned men of his age, 
Salmasius, tpiKotro^las irdinis iuppoBirri koI Xi/pa, as Eunapius 
says of Ammonius, Plutai'ch's scholar in Egypt, the delight, 
the music of all knowledge, who would have ^corned to drop 
a pen-full of ink against so base an adversary, but to maintain 
the honor bf so good a King ♦ * * * Get thee behind 
me, Milton ! Thou savourest not the things that be of truth 
and loyalty, but of pride, bitterness, and falsehood. There 
will be a time, though such a Shimei, a dead dog in Abishai's 
phrase, escape for a while * ♦ * It is no marvel if this 
canker-worm Milton, &c. 

HACKET. 167 

A contemporary of Bishpp Hacket's designates 
Milton as the author of a profane and lascivious 
poem entitled Paradise Lost. The biographer of our 
divine bard ought to have made a collection of all 
such passages. A German writer of a Life of 
Salmasius acknowledges that Milton had the better 
in the conflict in these wojrds : * Hans (Jack) von 
Milton — ^not to be compared in learning and genius 
with the incomparable Salmasius, yet a shrewd and 
cunning lawyer/ &c. sana posteritas / 

Ibid. 8. 178. 

Dare they not trust him that never broke with them? 
And I have heard his nearest servants say, that no man could 
ever challenge hun of the least lie. 

What ! this after the publication of Charles's 
letters to the Queen ! Did he not within a few 
months before his death enter into correspondence 
with, and sign contradictory offers to, three different 
parties, not meaning to keep any one of them ; and 
at length did he not die with something very like 
a falsehood in his mouth in allowing himself to be 
represented as the author of the Icon Basilike ? 

Ibid. s. 180. 

If an under-sheriff had arrested Harry Martin for debt, and 
pleaded that he did not imprison his membership, but his 
Martinship, would the Committee for privileges be fobbed off 
with that distinction ? 

To make this good in analogy, we must suppose 
that Harry Martin had notoriously neglected all the 
duties, while he perverted and abused all the 
privileges, of membership : and then I answer, that 
the Committee of privileges would have done well and 

168 BACKET. 

wisely in accepting the under-sheriff's distinction, 
and, out of respect for the membership, consigning 
the Martinship to the due course of law. 


That every tovX should he tuJbject to the higher powers. The 
higher power under which they lived was the mere power 
and will of Csesar, bridled in by no law. 

False, if meant dejure ; and if de facto ^ the plural 
powers would apply to the Parliament far better than 
to the King, and to Cromwell as well as to Nero. 
Every even decently good Emperor professed himself 
the servant of the Roman Senate. The very term 
Imperator, as Gravina observes, implies it; for it 
expresses a delegated and instrumental power. 
Before the assumption of the Tribunitial character 
by Augustus, by which he became the representative 
of the majority of the people, — majestatem indutns est, 
— Senatus consvlit, Popvlus jubet, imperant Consides, 
was the constitutional language. 

Ibid. B. 190. 

Tet 80 much dissonancy there was between his tongue and 
his heart, that he triumphed io the murder of Csesar, the 
only Roman that exceeded all their race in nobleness, and 
was next to Tully in eloquence. 

There is something so shameless in this self- 
contradiction as of itself almost to extinguish the 
belief that the prelatic royalists were conscientious in 
their conclusions. For if the Senate of Rome were 
not a lawful power, what could be ? And if Caesar, 
the thrice perjured traitor, was neither perjured nor 
traitor, only because he by his Gaulish troops turned a 
republic into a monarchy ,-^with what face, under what 
pretext, could Hacket abuse ' Sultan Cromwell?* 



I HAVE not seen the late Bishop Heher^s edition of 
Jeremy Taylor's Works ; but I have been informed 
that he did little more than contribute the Life, and 
that in all else it is a mere London booksellers' 
job. This, if true, is greatly to be regretted. I 
know no writer whose works more require, I need 
not say deserve, the annotations, ay, and occasional 
animadversions, of a sound and learned divine. One 
thing is especially desirable in reference to that most 
important, because (with the exception perhaps of 
the Holy Living and Dying) the most popular, of 
Taylor's works. The Liberty of Prophesying ; and 
this is a careful collation of the different editions, 
particularly of the first printed before the Restoration, 
and the last published in Taylor's lifetime, and after 
his promotion to the episcopal bench. Indeed, I 
regard this as so nearly concerning Taylor's character 
as a man, that if I find that it has not been done in 
Heber's edition, and if I find a first edition in the 
British Museum, or Sion College, or Dr. Williams's 
library, I will, God permitting, do it myself. There 
seems something cruel in giving the name, Anabaptist, 
to the English Anti-psedobaptists ; but still worse in 
connecting this most innocent opinion with the mad 
Jacobin ravings of the poor wretches who were called 
Anabaptists, in Munster, as if the latter had ever 
formed part of the Baptists' creeds. In short The 
Liberty of Prophesying is an admirable work, in 
many respects, and calculated to produce a much 
greater effect on the many than Milton's treatise on the 


same subject : on the other hand Milton's is through- 
out unmixed truth ; and the man who in reading the 
two does not feel the contrast between the single- 
mindedness of the one, and the strabismus in the 
other, is — in the road of preferment. 



Vol. VII. p. 9. 

And the breath of the people is like the voice of an 
exterminating angel, not so killing but so secret. 

That is, in such wise. It would be well to note, 
after what time * as ' became the requisite correla- 
tive to * so,* and even, as in this instance, the 
preferable substitute. We should have written * as ' 
in both places probably, but at all events in the 
latter, transplacing the sentences ' as secret though 
not so killing ; ' or * not so killing, but quite as 
secret.' It is not generally true that Taylor's 
punctuation is arbitrary, or his periods reducible to 
the post-Revolutionary standard of length by turning 
some of his colons or semi-colons into full-stops. 
There is a subtle yet just and systematic logic 
followed in his pointing, as often as it is permitted 
by the higher principle, because the proper and 
primary purpose, of our stops, and to which alone 
from their paucity they are adequate, — that I mean 
of enabling the reader to prepare and manage the 
proportions of his voice and breath. But for the 
true scheme of punctuation, i>s ifioiye doKei, see the 
blank page over leaf, which I will try to disblank 
into a prize of more worth than can be got at the 
E.O.*s and little goes of Lindley Murray, f 

* The references are here given to Heber's edition, 1822.— £%Z. 

t The page however remains a hlank. But a little essay on punctu- 


Ibid, p. 15. 

But the most complained that, in my ways to persuade a 
toleration, I helped some men too fi&r, and that I armed the 
Anabaptists with swords instead of shields, with a power to 
offend us, besides the proper defensitives of their own. * * * 
But wise men understand the thing and are satisfied. But 
because all men are not of equal strength ; I did not only in 
a discourse on purpose demonstrate the true doctrine in that 
question, but I have now in this edition of that book answered 
all their pretensions, &q. 

No ; in the might of his genius he called up a 
spirit which he has in vain endeavoured to lay, or 
exorcise from the connction. 

Ibid, p. 17. 

For episcopacy relies not upon the authority of Fathers 
and Councils, but upon Scripture, upon the institution of 
Christ, or the institution of the Apostles, upon a universal 
tradition, and a imiversal practice, not upon the words and 
opinions of the doctors: it hath as great a testimony as 
Scripture itself hath, &c. 

We must make allowance for the intoxication of 
recent triumph and final victory over a triumphing 
and victorious enemy ; or who but would start back 
at the aweless temerity of this assertion ? Not to 
mention the evasion ; for who ever denied the 
historical fact, or the Scriptural occurrence of the 
word expressing the fact, namely, episcopi, episcopa- 
tus ? What was questioned by the opponents was, 
1 ; — Who and what these episcopi were ; whether 
essentially different from the presbyter, or a presby- 
ter by kind in his own ecclesia, and a president or 
chairman by accident in a sjmod of presbyters : 2 ; — 

jition by the Author is in the Editor's possession, and will be published 


That whatever the epiicopi of the Apostolic times 
were, yet were they prelates, lordly diocesans ; were 
they such as the Bishops of the Church of England ? 
Was there Scripture authority for Archbishops? 
3; — That the establishment of Bishops by the 
Apostle Paul being granted (as who can deny it ?) — 
yet was this done jute Apostolico for the universal 
Church in all places and ages ; or only as expedient 
for that time and under those circumstances ; by 
Paul not as an Apostle, but as the head and founder 
of those particular churches, and so entitled to 
determine their bye laws ? 



Ibid. p. 28. 

But the interest of the Bishops is conjunct with the pros- 
perity of the King, besides the interest of their own security, 
by the obligation of secular advantages. For they who have 
their livelihood from the King, and are in expectance of their 
fortune from him, are more likely to pay a tribute of exacter 
duty, than others, whose fortunes are not in such immediate 
dependency on His Majesty. 

The cat out of the bag ! Consult the whole reigns 
of Charles I. and II. and the beginning of James II. 
Jeremy Taylor was at this time (blamelessly for 
himself and most honourably for his patrons) ambling 
on the high road of preferment; and to men so 
situated, however sagacious in other respects, it is 
not given to read the signs of the times. Little did 
Taylor foresee that to indiscreet avowals, like these, 
on the part of the court clergy, the exauctorations of 
the Bishops and the temporary overthrow of the 
Church itself would be in no small portion attributable. 
But the scanty measure and obscurity (if not rather. 


for SO bright a luminary, the occultation) of his pre- 
ferment after the Eestoration is a problem, of which 
perhaps his virtues present the most probable solution. 

Ibid. p. 25. 

A second return that episcopacy makes to royalty, is that 
which is the duty of all Christians, the paying tributes and 

This is true; and it was an evil hour for the 
Church, — and led to the loss of its convocation, the 
greatest and, in an enlarged state-policy, the most 
impolitic affront ever offered by a government to its 
own established church, — in which the clergy surren- 
dered their right of taxing themselves. 

Ibid. p. 27. 

I mean the conversion of the kingdom from Paganism by 
St. Augustine, Archbishop of Canterbury; and the Refor- 
mation begun and promoted by Bishops. 

From Paganism in part ; but in part from primi- 
tive Christianity to Popery. But neither this nor 
the following boast will bear narrow looking into, 
I suspect. 

In fine. 

Like all Taylor's dedications and dedicatory epistles, 
this is easy, dignified, and pregnant. The happiest 
synthesis of the divine, the scholar, and the gentleman 
was perhaps exhibited in him and Bishop Berkeley, 



Introd. p. 3. 
In all those accursed machinations, which the device and 
artifice of hell hath invented for the supplanting of the 


Church, intmicus homo, that old superseminator of heresies 
and crude mischiefs, hath endeavoured to be curiously 
compendious, and, with Tarquin's device, pv/tare summa 

Quaere — spiritttcUiter papavercUorum f 


His next onset was by Julian, and occidere presbyteriumj 
that was his province. To shut up public schools, to force 
Christians to ignorance, to impoverish and disgrace the 
clergy, to make them vile and dishonorable, these are his 
arts ; and he did the devil more service in this fineness of 
undermining, than aU the open battery of ten great rams of 

What felicity, what vivacity of expression ! Many 
years ago Mr. Mackintosh gave it as an instance of 
my perverted taste, that I had seriously contended 
that in order to form a style worthy of Englishmen, 
Milton and Taylor must be studied instead of Johnson, 
Gibbon, and Junius ; and now I see by his introductory 
Lecture given at Lincoln's Inn, and just published, 
he is himself imitating Jeremy Taylor, or rather 
copying his semi-colon punctuation, as closely as he 
can. Amusing it is to observe, how by the time the 
modem imitators are at the half-way of the long 
breathed period, the asthmatic thoughts drop down, 
and the rest is, — words! I have always been an 
obstinate hoper: and even this is a datum and a 
symptom of hope to me, that a better, an ancestral, 
spirit is forming and will appear in the rising 

Ibid, p. 5. 

First, because here is a concourse of times ; for now after 
that these times have been called the last times for 1600 
years together, our expectation of the great revelation is 
very near acoomplishing. 


Rather a \rhimsical consequence, that because a 
certain party had been deceiving themselves for 
sixteen centuries they were likely to be in the right 
at the beginning of the seventeenth. But indeed I 
question whether in all Taylor's voluminous writings 
there are to be found three other paragraphs so 
vague and misty-magnific as this is. It almost re- 
minds me of the " very cloudy and mighty alarming " 
in Foote. 

Ibid, 8. 1, p. 4. 

If there be such a thing as the power of the keys, by Christ 
concredited to his Church, for the binding and loosing de- 
linquents and penitents respectively on earth, then there is 
clearly a court erected by Christ in his Church. 

We may, vnthout any heretical division of person, 
economically distinguish our Lord's character as 
Jesus, and as Christ, so far that during his sojourn 
on earth, from his baptism at least to his crucifixion, 
he was in some respects his own Elias, bringing back 
the then existing Church to the point at which the 
Prophets had placed it; that is, distinguishing the 
ethica from the politica, what was binding on the 
Jews as descendants of Abraham and inheritors of 
the patriarchal faith from the statutes obligatory on 
them as members of the Jewish state. Jesus fulfilled 
the Law, which culminated in a pure religious 
morality in principles, affections, and acts ; and this 
he consolidated and levelled into the ground-stead on 
which the new temple not made with hands, wherein 
Himself, even Christ the Lord, is the Shechinah, 
was to rise and be raised. Thus he taught the spirit 
of the Mosaic Law, while by his acts, sufferings, 
death, resurrection, ascension, and demission of the 
Comforter, he created and realised the contents, 


objects, and materials of that redemptive faitih, the 
everlasting gospel, which from the day of Pentecost 
his elect disciples, t&v fivaTrjpConv UpoK'qpvKe^t were 
sent forth to disperse and promulgate with suitable 
gifts, powers, and evidences. In this view, I interpret 
our Lord's sayings concerning the Church, as applying 
wholly to the Synagogue or established Church then 
existing, while the binding and loosing refers, imme- 
diately and primarily as I conceive, to the miraculous 
gifts of healing diseases communicated to the Apostles; 
and I am not afraid to avow the conviction, that the 
first three Gospels are not the books of the New 
Testament, in which we should expect to find the 
peculiar doctrines of the Christian faith explicitly 
delivered, or forming the predominant subject or 
contents of the writing. 

lUd. 8. 8, p. 25. 

Imposition of hands for Ordination does indeed give the 
Holy Ghost, but not as he is that promise which is called the 
promise of the truth, 

Alas ! but in what sense that does not imply some 
infusion of power or light, something given and 
inwardly received, which would not have existed in 
and for the recipient without this immission by the 
means or act of the imposition of the hands ? What 
sense that does not amount to more and other than a 
mere delegation of office, a mere legitimating accept- 
ance and acknowledgment, with respect to the person, 
of that which already is in him, can be attached to 
the words. Receive the Holy Ghost, without shocking 
a pious and single-minded candidate ? The miraculous 
nature of the giving does not depend on the particular 
kind or quality of the gift received, much less demand 
that it should be confined to the power of working 


For "miraculous nature" read "supernatural 
character;" and I can subscribe this pencil note 
written so many years ago, even at this present time« 
2d March, 1824. 

Ibid. 8. 21, p. 91. 

Postqiuj/m mmsguisqwe eos qitos baptizdbat stkoa putabat esse, 
non Christi, et diceretwr in popidia, Ego sum Pamlif Ego ApolU), 
Ego autem CepkoBy in toto orhe decretwn est ut unut de presby- 
teris electus sfoperponeretur ccBteris, ut schiamcUum semina 

The natural inference would, methinks, be the 
contrary. There would be more persons inclined and 
more likely to attach an ambition to their belonging 
to a single eminent leader and head than to a body, — 
rather to Caesar, Marius, or Pompey, than to the 
Senate. But I have ever thought that the best, 
safest, and at the same time sufficient, argument is, 
that by the nature of human affairs and the appoint- 
ments of God's ordinary providence every assembly 
of functionaries will and must have a president ; that 
the same qualities which recommended the individual 
to this dignity would naturally recommend him to 
the chief executive power during the intervals of 
legislation, and at all times in all points already 
ruled ; that the most solemn acts, Confirmation and 
Ordination, would as naturally be confined to the 
head of the executive in the state ecclesiastic, as the 
sign manual and the like to the king in all limited 
monarchies ; and that in course of time when many 
presbyteries would exist in the same district, Arch- 
bishops and Patriarchs would arise pari ratione as 
Bishops did in the first instance. Now it is admitted 
that God's extraordinary appointments never repeal 
but rather perfect the laws of his ordinary provi- 
dence ; and it is enough that all we find in the New 

VOL. I. N 


Testament tends to confirm and no where forbids, 
contradicts, or invalidates the course of government, 
which the Church, we are certain, did in faxit pursue. 

Ibid, 8. 36, p. 171. 

But those things which Christianity, as it prescinds from 
the interest of the republic, hath introduced, all them, and 
all the causes emergent from them, the Bishop is judge of 
* * • * Receiving and disposing the patrimony of the 
Church, and whatsoever is of the same consideration 
according to the forty-first canon of the Apostles. Prcecipi- 
mu» ut m potetUUe nui epUcopva ecduuB res habeat. Let the 
Bishops have the disposing of the goods of the Church ; 
adding this reason : si enim cmima hominvm pretioscB Uli sint 
crediUs, mvlto mcbgw efum oportet cwam pecwniarvm gerere. He 
that is intrusted with our precious souls may much more be 
intrusted with the offertories of faithful people. 

Let all these belong to the overseer of the Church : 
to whom else so properly ? but what is the nature of 
the power by which he is to enforce his orders ? By 
secular power? Then the Bishop's power is no 
derivative from Christ's royalty ; for his kingdom is 
not of the world ; but the monies are Csasar's ; and 
the cura pecuniarum must be vested where the 
donors direct, the law of the land permitting. 


Such are the delinquencies of clerg3^en, who are both 
clergy and subjects too ; clerus Dommi, and regis subditi : 
and for their delinquencies, which are in materia jttstiticB, the 
secular tribunal punishes, as being a violation of that right 
which the state must defend ; but because done by a person 
who is a member of the sacred hierarchy, and hath also an 
obligation of special duty to his Bishop, therefore the Bishop 
also may punish him; and when the commonwealth hath 
inflicted a penalty, the Bishop also may impose a censure, 
for every sin of a clergyman is two. 


But why of a clergyman only ? Is not every sheep 
of his flock a part of the Bishop's charge, and of 
course the possible object of his censure ? The clergy, 
you say, take the oath of obedience. Aye ! but this 
is the point in dispute. 

Ibid, p. 172. 

So that ever since then episcopal jurisdiction hath a double 
part, an external and an internal : this is derived from Christ, 
that from the king, which because it is concurrent in all acts 
of jurisdiction, therefore it is that the king is supreme of the 
jurisdiction, namely, that part of it which is the external 

If Christ delegated no external compulsory power 
to the Bishops, how came it the duty of princes to 
God to do so ? It has been so since — ^yes ! since the 
first grand apostasy from Christ to Constemtine. 

Ibid. s. 48, p. 248. 

Bishops tU sic are not secular princes, must not seek for 
it ; but some secular princes may be Bishops, as in Germany 
and in other places to this day they are. For it is as imlaw- 
ful for a Bishop to have any land, as to have a coimtry ; and 
a single acre is no more due to the order than a province ; 
but both these may be conjunct in the same person, though 
still, by virtue of Christ's precept, the functions and capacities 
must be distinguished. 

True ; but who with more indignant scorn attacked 
this very distinction when applied by the Presbyte- 
rians to the kingship, when they professed to fight 
for the King against Charles ? And yet they had on 
their side both the spirit of the English constitution 
and the language of the law. The King never dies ; 
the King can do no wrong. Elsewhere, too, Taylor 

could ridicule the Romish prelate, who fought and 



slew men as a captain at the head of his vassals, and 
then in the character of a Bishop absolved his other 
homicidal self. However, whatever St. Peter might 
understand by Christ's words, St. Peter's three- 
crowned successors have been quite of Taylor's 
opinion that they are to be paraphrased thus : — 
" Simon Peter, as my Apostle, you are to make con- 
verts only by humility, voluntary poverty, and the 
words of truth and meekness ; but if by your spiritual 
influence you can induce the Emperor Tiberius to 
make you Tetrarch of Galilee or Prefect of Judsea, 
then KaraKvpCevc — ^you may lord it as loftily as you 
will, and deliver as Tetrarch or Prefect those stiff- 
necked miscreants to the flames for not having been 
converted by you as an Apostle." 

im, p. 276. 

I end with the golden rule of Vincentius Lirinensis : — 
magnopere curwndum est v/t id teneamva^ qwtd vbique, quod 
sempeTf quod ab omnibm credUvm est, 

Alas ! this golden rule comes full and round from 
the mouth, nor do I deny that it is pure gold : but 
like too many other golden rules, in order to make it 
cover the facts which the orthodox asserter of epis- 
copacy at least, and the chaplain of Archbishop Laud 
and King Charles the Martyr must have held himself 
bound to bring under it, it must be made to display 
another property of the sovereign metal, its mallea- 
bleness to wit ; and must be beaten out so thin, that 
the weight of truth in the portion appertaining to each 
several article in the orthodox systems of theology 
will be so small, that it may better be called gilt than 
gold ; and if worth having at all, it will be for its 
show, not for its substance. For instance, the aranea 
tkeologica may draw out the whole web of the West- 


minster Catechism from the simple creed of the 
beloved Disciple, — whoever believeth with his hearty 
and professeth with his mouthy that Jesus is Lord and 
Christ, — shall be saved. If implicit faith only be 
required, doubtless certain doctrines, from which all 
other articles of faith imposed by the Lutheran, 
Scotch, or English Churches may be deduced, have 
been believed ubique, semper, et ah omnibus. But if 
explicit and conscious belief be intended, I would 
rather that the Bishop than I should defend the 
golden rule against Semler. 



Pr^ace, s. 6, p. 286. 

Not like women or children when they are affrighted with 
fire in their clothes. We shaked off the coal indeed, but not 
our garments, lest we should have exposed our Churches to 
that nakedness which the excellent men of our sister 
Churches complained to be among themselves. 

O, what convenient things metaphors and similes 
are, so charmingly indeterminate ! On the general 
reader the literal sense operates : he shivers in sym- 
pathy with the poor shiftless matron, the Church of 
Geneva. To the objector the answer is ready — ^it was 
speaking metaphorically, and only meant that she had 
no shift on the outside of her gown, that she made 
a shift without an over-all. Compare this sixth sec- 
tion with the manful, senseful, irrebuttable fourth 
section — a folio volume in a single paragraph ! But 
Jeremy Taylor would have been too great for man, 
had he not occasionally fallen below himself. 

Ibid. s. 10, p. 288. 

And since all that cast off the Roman yoke thought they 
had title enough to be called Reformed^ it was hard to have 


pleased all the private interests and peevishness of men that 
called themselves friends ; and therefore that only in which 
the Church of Rome had prevaricated against the word of 
God, or innovated against Apostolical tradition, all that was 
pared away. 

Aye ! here is the ovum^ as Sir Everard Home would 
say, the ^woto-parent of the whole race of contro- 
versies between Protestant and Protestant ; and each 
had Gospel on their side. Whatever is not against 
the word of God is for it, — thought the founders of 
the Church of England. Whatever is not in the 
word of God is a word of man, a will-worship pre- 
sumptuous and usurping, — thought the founders of 
the Church of Scotland and Geneva. The one pro- 
posed to themselves to be reformers of the Latin 
Church, that is, to bring it back to the form which it 
had during the first four centuries ; the latter to be 
the renovators of the Christian religion as it was 
preached and instituted by the Apostles and imme- 
diate followers of Christ thereunto specially inspired. 
Where the premisses are so different, who can wonder 
at the difference in the conclusions ? 

Ibid, 8. 12, ib. 

It began early to discover its inconvenience; for when 
certain zealous persons fled to Frankfort to avoid the funeral 
piles kindled by the Boman Bishops in Queen Mary's time, 
as if they had not enemies enough abroad, they fell foul of 
one another, and the quarrel was about the Common Prayer 

But who began the quarrel ? Knox and his recent 
biographer lay it to Dr. Cox and the Liturgists. 

lUd, 8. 13, p. 289. 

Here therefore it became law, was established by an Act 
€f Parliament, was made solenm by an appendant penalty 


against all that on either hand did prevaricate a sanction of 
so long and so prudent consideration. 

Truly evangelical way of solemnising a party mea- 
sure, and sapientising Calvin's tolerabiles ineptias by 
making them ineptias usque ad carcerem et verbera 
intolerantes ! 

Ibid, 8. 14, lb, 

^ But the Common Prayer Book had the fate of St. Paul ; 
for when it had scaped the storms of the Roman See, yet a 
viper sprung out of Queen Mary's fires, &c. 

As Knox and his friends confined themselves to the 
inspired word, whether vipers or no, they were not 
adders at all events. 

Ibid, 6. 26, p. 296. 

For, if we deny to the people a liberty of reading the Scrip- 
tures, may they not complain, as Isaac did against the 
inhabitants of the land, that the Philistines had spoiled his 
well and the fountains of living water ? If a &ee use of all 
of them and of all Scriptures were permitted, should not 
the Church herself have more cause to complain of the infi- 
nite licentiousness and looseness of interpretations, and of 
the commencement of ten thousand errors, which would 
certainly be consequent to such permission? Reason and 
religion will chide us in the first, reason and experience in 
the latter. * * * The Church with great wisdom hath 
first held this torch out ; and though for great reasons inter- 
vening and hindering, it cannot be reduced to practice, yet 
the Church hath shewn her desire to avoid the evil that is 
on both hands, and she hath shewn the way also, if it could 
have been insisted in. 

If there were not, at the time this Preface, or 
this paragraph at least, was written or published, 
some design on foot or sub lingua of making advances 


to the continental Catholicism for the purpose of 
conciliating the courts of Austria, France and Spain, 
in favour of the Cavalier and Royalist party at home 
and ahroad, this must be considered as a useless and 
worse than useless avowal. The Papacy at the height 
of its influence never asserted a higher or more anti- 
Protestant right than this of dividing the Scriptures 
into permitted and forbidden portions. If there be 
a functionary of divine institution, sy nodical or uniper- 
sonal, who with the name of the * Church' has the 
right, under circumstances of its own determination, 
to forbid all but such and such parts of the Bible, it 
must possess potentially, and under other circum- 
stances, a right of withdrawing the whole book from 
the unle£urned, who yet cannot be altogether unlearned ; 
for the very prohibition supposes them able to do 
what, a few centuries before, the majority of the 
clergy themselves were not qualified to do, that is, 
read their Bible throughout. Surely it would have 
been politic in the writer to have left out this sentence, 
which his Puritan adversaries could not fail to trans- 
late into the Church showing her teeth though she 
djured not bite. I bitterly regret these passages; 
neither our incomparable Liturgy, nor this full, mas- 
terly, and unanswerable defence of it, requiring them. 

IHd. s. 45, p. 308. 

So that the Church of England, in these manners of dis- 
pensmg the power of the keys, does cut oflF all disputings and 
impertinent wranglings, whether the priest's power were 
judicial or declarative ; for possibly it is both, and it is optative 
too, and something else yet ; for it is an emanation from all the 
parts of his ministry, and he never absolves, but he preaches or 
prays, or administers a sacrament ; for this power of remission 
is a transcendent, passing through all the parts of the priestly 
offices. For the keys of the kingdom of heaven are the pro- 


xnises and the threatenings of the Scripture, and the prayers 
of the Church, and the Word, and the Sacraments, and all 
these are to be dispensed by the priest, and these keys are 
committed to his ministry, and by the operation of them all 
he opens and shuts heaven's gates ministerially. 

No more ingenious way of making nothing of a 
thing than by making it everything. Omnify the 
disputed point into a transcendant, and you may defy 
the opponent to lay hold of it. He might as well 
attempt to grasp an aura electrka. 

Apology, &c. s. 2, p. 320. 

And it may bo when I am a little more used to it, I shall 
not wonder at a synod, in which not one Bishop sits in the 
capacity of a Bishop, though I am most certain this is the first 
example in England since it was first christened. 

Is this quite fair ? Is it not, at least logically con- 
sidered and at the commencement of an argument, 
too like a petitio principii or presumptio rei litigata ? 
The Westminster divines were confessedly not pre- 
lates, but many in that assembly were, in all other 
points, orthodox and affectionate members of the 
Establishment, who with Bedell, Lightfoot, and 
Usher, held them to be Bishops in the primitive sense 
of the term, and who yet had no Avish to make any 
other change in the hierarchy than that of denomi- 
nating the existing English prelates Archbishops. 
They thought that what at the bottom was little more 
than a question of names among Episcopalians, ought 
not to have occasioned such a dispute ; but yet the 
evil having taken place, they held a change of names 
not too great a sacrifice, if thus the things themselves 
could be preserved, and Episcopacy maintained against 
the Independents and Presbyterians. 


Ibid, B. 5, p. 321. 

It is a thing of no present importance, but as a 
point of history, it is worth a question whether there 
were any divines in the Westminster Assembly who 
adopted by anticipation the notions of the Seekers, 
Quakers and others eJTisdemfariruB, Baxter denies 
it. I understand the controversy to have been, 
whether the examinations at the admission to the 
ministry did or not supersede the necessity of 
any directive models besides those found in the 
sacred volumes : — if not necessary, whether there was 
any greater expedience in providing by authority 
forms of prayer for the minister than forms of 
sermons. Reading, whether of prayers or sermons, 
might be discouraged without encouraging unpre- 
meditated praying and preaching. But the whole 
question as between the prelatists and the Assembly 
of divines has like many others been best solved by 
the trial. A vast majority among the Dissenters 
themselves consider the antecedents to the sermon, 
with exception of their congregational hymns, as the 
defective part of their public service, and admit the 
superiority of our Liturgy. 

P.S. — It seems to me, I confess, that the contro- 
versy could never have risen to the height it did, if 
all the parties had not thrown too far into the back 
ground the distinction in nature and object between 
the three equally necessary species of worship, that 
is, public, family, and private or solitary, devotion. 
Though the very far larger proportion of the blame 
falls on the anti-Liturgists, yet on the other hand, 
too many of our Church divines — among others that 
exemplar of a Churchman and a Christian, the every 
way excellent George Herbert — were scared by the 
growing fanaticism of the Geneva malcontents into 


the neighbourhood of the opposite extreme ; and in 
their dread of enthusiasm, will-worship, insubordina- 
tion, indecency, carried their preference of the 
established public forms of prayer almost to super- 
stition by exclusively both using and requiring them 
even on their own sick-beds. This most assuredly 
was neither the intention nor the wish of the first 
compilers. However, if they erred in this, it was an 
error of filial love excused, and only not sanctioned, 
by the love of peace and unity, and their keen sense 
of the beauty of holiness displayed in their mother 
Church. I mention this the rather because our 
Church, having in so incomparable a way provided 
for our public devotions, and Taylor having himself 
enriched us with such and so many models of private 
prayer and devotional exercise — (from which, by the 
by, it is most desirable that a well 6urranged collection 
should be made ; a selection is requisite rather from 
the opulence, than the inequality, of the store ;) — we 
have nothing to wish for but a collection of family 
and domestic prayers and thanksgivings equally (if 
that be not too bold a wish) appropriate to the special 
object, as the Common Prayer Book is for a Christian 
community, and the collection from Taylor for the 
Christian in his closet or at his bed side. Here 
would our author himself again furnish abundant 
materials for the work. For surely, since the 
Apostolic age, never did the spirit of supplication 
move on the deeps of a human soul with a cCiore 
genial life, or more profoundly impregnate the rich 
gifts of a happy nature, than in the person of Jeremy 
Taylor ! To render the fruits available for all, we 
need only a combination of Christian experience with 
that finer sense of propriety which we may venture 
to C£l11 devotional taste in the individual choosing, or 
chosen, to select, arrange and methodise; and no 


less in the dignitaries appointed to revise and 
sanction the collections. 

Perhaps another want is a scheme of Christian 
psalmody fit for all our congregations, and which 
should not exceed 150 or 200 psalms and hymns. 
Surely if the Church does not hesitate in the titles 
of the Psalms and of the chapters of the Prophets to 
give the Christian sense and application, there can 
he no consistent ohjection to do the same in its 
spiritual songs. The effect on the morals, feelings, 
and information of the people at large is not to be 
calculated. It is this more than any other single 
cause that has saved the peasantry of Protestant 
Germany from the contagion of infidelity. 

Ibid, 8. 17, p. 325. 

Thus the Holy Ghost brought to their memory all things 
which Jesus spake and did, and, by that means, we come to 
know all that the Spirit knew to be necessary for us. 

Alas ! it is one of the sad effects or results of the 
enslaving Old Bailey fashion of defending, or, as we 
may well call it, apologising for, Christianity, — intro- 
duced by Grotius and followed up by the modem 
Alogi, whose worldless, lifeless, spiritless, scheme of 
belief it alone suits, — that we dare not ask, whether 
the passage here referred to must necessarily be 
understood as asserting a miraculous remembrancing, 
distinctly sensible by the Apostles ; whether the gift 
had any especial reference to the composition of the 
Gospels ; whether the assumption is indispensable to 
a well grounded and adequate confidence in the 
veracity of the narrators or the verity of the nar- 
ration ; if not, whether it does not unnecessarily 
entangle the faith of the acute and learned inquirer 
in difficulties, which do not affect the credibility of 


history in its common meaning — rather indeed con- 
firm our reliance on its authority in all the points of 
agreement, that is, in every point which we are in 
the least concerned to know, — and expose the simple 
and unlearned Christian to ohjections best fitted to 
perplex, hecause easiest to be understood, and within 
the capacity of the shallowest infidel to bring forward 
and exaggerate ; and lastly, whether the Scriptures 
must not be read in that faith which comes from 
higher sources than history, that is, if they are read 
to any good and Christian purpose. God forbid that 
I should become the advocate of mechanical infusions 
and possessions, superseding the reason and re- 
sponsible will. The light a priori, in which, according 
to my conviction, the Scriptures must be read and 
tried, is no other than the earnest. What shall I do 
to be saved? with the inward consciousness, — the 
gleam or flash let into the inner man through the 
rent or cranny of the prison of sense, however pro- 
duced by earthquake, or by decay, — as the ground 
and antecedent of the question ; and with a predis- 
position towards, and an insight into, the a priori 
probability of the Christian dispensation as the 
necessary consequents. This is the holy spirit 
in us praying to the spirit, without which no man can 
say that Jesus is the Lord: a text which of itself 
seems to me sufficient to cover the whole scheme of 
modem Unitarianism with confusion, when compared 
with that other, — I am the Lord (Jehovah J : that is 
my name ; and my glory will I not give to another. 
But in the Unitarian's sense of ' Lord,* and on his 
scheme of evidence, it might with equal justice be 
affirmed, that no man can say that Tiberius was the 
Emperor but by the Holy Ghost. 


lUd, B. 29, p. 831. 

And that this is for this reason called a gift and grace, or 
issue of the Spirit, is so evident and notorious, that the 
speaking of an ordinary revealed truth, is called in Scripture, 
a speaJcing by the Spirit, 1 Cor. xii 8. No num own, say thai Jesus 
is the Lord Jmtbythe Holy Qhost, For, though the world could 
not acknowledge Jesus for the Lord without a revelation, yet 
now that we are taught this truth by Scripture, and by the 
preaching of the Apostles, to which they were enabled by 
the Holy Ghost, we need no revelation or enthusiasm to 
confess this truth, which we are taught in our creeds and 
catechisms, &c. 

I do not, nay I dare not, hesitate to denounce 
this assertion as false in fact and the paralysis of all 
effective Christianity. A greater violence offered to 
Scripture words is scarcely conceivable. St. Paul 
asserts that no man can. Nay, says Taylor, every 
man that knows his catechism can ; but unless some 
six or seven individuals had said it by the Holy 
Ghost some seventeen or eighteen hundred years 
ago, no man could say so. 

lUd. s. 32, p. 334. 

And yet because the Holy Ghost renewed their memory, 
improved their understanding, supplied to some their want 
of himian learning, and so assisted them that they should not 
commit an error in fact or opinion, neither in the narrative 
nor dogmatical parts, therefore they wrote by the Spirit. 

And where is the proof? — ^and to what purpose, 
unless a distinct and plain diagnostic were given of 
the divinities and the humanities which Taylor him- 
self expressly admits in the text of the Scriptures ? 
And even then what would it avail unless the inter- 
preters and translators, not to speak of the copyists 
iu the first and second centuries, were likewise 



assisted by inspiration ? As to the larger part of the 
Prophetic books, and the whole of the Apocalypse, 
we must receive them as inspired truths, or reject 
them as simple inventions or enthusiastic delusions. 
But in what other book of Scripture does the writer 
assign his own work to a miraculous dictation or 
infusion? Surely the contrary is implied in St. 
Luke's preface. Does the hypothesis rest on one 
possible construction of a single passage in St. Paul, 
2 Tim. iii. 16.? And that construction resting 
materially on a koL (dcoTrycvoro?, koX ii<f>iKi}ios) not 
found in the oldest MSS., when the context would 
rather lead us to understand the words as parallel 
with the other assertion of the Apostle, that all good 
works are given from God, — that is. Every divinely 
inspired writing is profitable, dc. Finally, will not 
the certainty of the competence and single minded- 
ness of the writers suflBce ; this too confirmed by the 
high probability, bordering on certainty, that God's 
especial grace worked in them ; and that an especial 
providence watched over the preservation of writings, 
which, we know, both are and have been of such pre- 
eminent importance to Christianity, and yet by 
natural means? But alas! any thing will be pre- 
tended, rather than admit the necessity of internal 
evidence, or than acknowledge, among the external 
proofs, the convictions and spiritual experiences of 
believers, though they should be common to all the 
faithful in all ages of the Church ! But in all super- 
stition there is a heart of unbelief, and, vice versa^ 
where an individual's belief is but a superficial 
acquiescence, credulity is the natural result and 
accompaniment, if only he be not required to sink 
into the depths of his being, where the sensual man 
can no longer draw breath. It is not the profession 
of Socinian tenets, but the spirit of Socinianism in the 


Church itself that alarms me. This, this, is the dry 
rot iu the beams and timbers of the Temple 1 

Ibid. 8. 51, p. 348. 

So that let the devotion be ever so great, set forms of 
prayer will be expressive enough of any desire, though 
importunate as extremity itself. 

This, and much of the same import in this treatise^ 
is far more than Taylor, mature in experience and 
softened by afflictions, would have written. Besides, 
it is in effect, though not in logic, a deserting of his 
own strong and unshaken ground of the means and 
ends of public worship. 

Ibid, 88. 69, 70, pp. 359— -60. 

These two sections are too much in the vague 
mythical style of the Italian and Jesuit divines, and 
the argument gives to these a greater advantage 
against our Church than it gains over the Sectarians 
in its support. We well know who and how many 
the compilers of our Liturgy were under Edward VI., 
and know too well what the weather-cock Parliaments 
were, both then and under Elizabeth, by which the 
compilation was made law. The argument therefore 
should be inverted; — ^not that the Church (A. B., 
C. D., F. L., &c.) compiled it ; ergo, it is unobjection- 
able ; but (and truly we may say it) it is so unob- 
jectionable, so far transcending all we were entitled 
to expect from a few men in that state of information 
and such difficulties, that we are justified in con- 
cluding that the compilers were under the guidance 
of the Holy Spirit. But the same order holds good 
even with regard to the Scriptures. We cannot 
rightly affirm they were inspired, and therefore they 


must be believed; but they are worthy of belief, 
because excellent in so universal a sense to ends 
commensurate with the whole moral, and therefore 
the whole actual, world, that as sure as there is a 
moral Governor of the world, they must have been 
in some sense or other, and that too an efficient 
sense, inspired. Those who deny this, must be 
prepared to assert, that if they had what appeared to 
them good historic evidence of a miracle, in the 
world of the senses, they would receive the hideous 
immoral doctrines of Mahomet or Brahma, and thus 
disobey the express commands both of the Old and 
New Testament. Though an angel should come 
from heaven and work all miracles, yet preach 
another doctrine, we are to hold him accursed. 
Gal. i. 8. 

Ibid, 8. 75, p. 356. 
When Christ was upon the Mount, he gave it for a pattern, &c. 

I cannot thoroughly agree with Taylor in all he 
says on this point. The Lord^s Prayer is an ency- 
clopedia of prayer, and of all moral and religious 
phiosophy under the form of prayer. Besides this, 
that nothing shall be wanting to its perfection, it is 
itself singly the best and most divine of prayers. But 
had this been the main and primary purpose, it must 
have been thenceforward the only prayer permitted 
to Christians ; and surely some distinct references to 
it would have been found in the Apostolic writings. 

lUd, s. 80, p. 358. 

Now then I demand, whether the prayer of Manasses be so 

good a prayer as the Lord's prayer ? Or is the prayer of 

Judith, or of Tobias, or of Judas Maccabeus, or of the son of 

Sirach, is any of these so good] Certainly no man will say 
VOL. I. o 


they are ; and the reason isj becftuse we are not sure they 
are inspired by the Holy Spirit of God. 

How inconsistent Taylor often is, the result of the 
system of economising truth! The true reason is 
the inverse. The prayers of Judith and the rest are 
not worthy to be compared with the Lord's Prayer ; 
therefore neither is the spirit in which they were con- 
ceived worthy to be compared with the spirit from 
which the Lord's Prayer proceeded: and therefore 
with all fulness of satisfaction we receive the latter, 
as indeed and in fact our Lord's dictation. 

In all men and in all works of great genius the 
characteristic fault will be found in the characteristic 
excellence. Thus in Taylor, fulness, overflow, super- 
fluity. His arguments are a procession of all the 
nobles and magnates of the land in their grandest, 
richest, and most splendid paraphernalia : but the 
total impression is weakened by the multitudes of 
lacqueys and ragged intruders running in and out 
between the ranks. As far as the Westminster 
divines were the antagonists to be answered — and 
with the exception of these, and those who like 
Baxter, Calamy, and Bishop Reynolds, con tended, for 
a reformation or correction only of the Church 
Liturgy, there were none worth answering. — the 
question was, not whether the use of one and the 
same set of prayers on all days in all churches was 
innocent, but whether the exclusive imposition of the 
same was comparatively expedient and conducive to 
edification? Let us not too severely arraign the 
judgment or the intentions of the good men who 
determined for the negative. If indeed we confined 
ourselves to the comparison between our Liturgy, and 
any and all of the proposed substitutes for it, we could 
not hesitate: hut those good men, in addition to 
their prejudices, had to compare the lives, the con- 


versation, and the religious affections and principles 

of the prelatic and anti-prelatic parties in general. 

And do not we ourselves now do the like ? Are we 

not, and with abundant reason, thankful that Jacobinism 

is rendered comparatively feeble and its deadly venom 

neutralised, by the profligacy and open irreligion of 

the majority of its adherents? Add the recent 

cruelties of the Star Chamber under Laud ; — (I do 

not say the intolerance ; for that which was common 

to both parties, must be construed as an error in both, 

rather than a crime in either) ; — and do not forget 

the one great inconvenience to which the prelatic 

divines were exposed from the very position which it 

was the peculiar honor of the Church of England to 

have taken and maintained, namely, the golden 

mean ; — (for in consequence of this their arguments 

as Churclamen would often have the appearance of 

contrasting with their grounds of controversy as 

Protestants,) — and we shall find enough to sanction 

our charity as brethren, without detracting a tittle 

from our loyalty as members of the established 

Church. As to this Apology, the victory doubtless 

remains with Taylor on the whole ; but to have 

rendered it full and triumphant, it would have been 

necessary to do what perhaps could not at that time, 

and by Jeremy Taylor, have been done with prudence ; 

namely, not only to disprove in part, but likewise in 

part to explain, the alleged difference of the spiritual 

fruits in the ministerial labors of the high and low 

party in the Church, — (for remember that at this 

period both parties were in the Church, even as the 

Evangelical, Reformed and Pontifical parties before 

the establishment of a schism by the actually schis- 

raatical Council of Trent,) — and thus to demonstrate 

that the differences to the disadvantage of the 

established Church, as far as they were real, were as 

o 2 


little attributable to tbe Liturgy, as the wound in the 
heel of Achilles to the shield and breast-plate which 
his immortal mother had provided for him from the 
forge divine. 

/6iU 8. 86, p. 861. 

That the Apostles did use the prayer theur Lord taught 
them, I think needs not much be questioned. 

Ad contra, see above. But that they did not till 
the siege of Jerusalem deviate unnecessarily from 
the established usage of the Synagogue is beyond 
rational doubt. We may therefore safely maintain 
that a set form was sanctioned by Apostolic practice; 
though the form was probably settled after the 
converts from Paganism began to be the majority 
of Christians. 

JUd, B. 87, p. 361. 

Now that they tied themselves to recitation of the very 
words of Christ's prayer pro loco et tempore, I am therefore 
easy to believe, because I find they were strict to a scruple 
in retaming the sacramental words which Christ spake when 
he instituted the blessed Sacrament. 

Not a case in point. Besides it assumes the 
controverted sense of ovrois as *in these words' 
versus * to this purport.* Grotius and Lightfoot, 
however, have settled this dispute by proving that 
the Lord's prayer is a selection of prayers from the 
Jewish ritual; and a most happy and valuable 
inference against novelties obtruded for novelty's 
sake does Grotius draw from this fact. When I 
consider the manner in which the Jews usually 
quoted or referred to particular passages of Scripture, 
it does not seem altogether improbable that the 
several articles of the Oratio Dominica might have 


been the initial sentences of several prayers ; but I 
have not the least doubt that by the loud utterance 
of the My God! my God! why hast thou forsaken 
me? our blessed Redeemer referred to and recalled 
to John and Mary that most wonderful and prophetic 
twenty-second Psalm. And what a glorious light 
does not this throw on the whole scene of the 
crucifixion, and in what additional loveliness does it 
not present the god-like character of the crucified 
Son of Man ! With the very facts before them, of 
which the former and larger portion of the Psalm 
referred to resembles a detailed history rather than 
a prophecy, — with what force, and with what lively 
consolation and infusion of stedfast hope and fedth, 
when all human grounds of hope had sunk from 
under them, must not the obvious and inevitable 
inference have Bashed on the convictions of the holy 
mother and the beloved disciple ! * If all we now 
behold was pre-ordained and so distinctly predicted ; 
if the one mournful half of the prophecy has been so 
entirely and minutely fulfilled, after so great a lapse 
of ages, dare we, can we, doubt for a moment that 
the glorious remainder will with equal fidelity be 
accomplished?' Thus to his very last moments did 
our Lord (setting as it beseemed the sun of righteous- 
ness to set) manifest with a wider and vnder face of 
glory his self-oblivious love. In the act he was 
offering, he himself was a sacrifice of love for the 
whole creation ; and yet the cup overflowed into 
particular streams ; first, for his enemies, his perse- 
cutors, and murderers; then for his friends and 
humanly nearest relative; Woman, behold thy son! 
O what a transfer ! Nor does the proposed interpre- 
tation preclude any inward and mysterious sense of 
the words My God! my God! — though I confess I 
have never yet met with a single plausible resolution 


of the words into any one of the mysteries of the 
Trinity, or the Incarnation, or the Passion. Nay, 
were there any necessity for supposing such an 
allusion, which there is not, the obvious interpretation 
would, I fear, too dangerously favour the heresy of 
those who divided and severed the divinity from the 
humanity ; so that not the incarnate God, very God 
of very God, would have atoned for us on the cross, 
but the incarnating man ; a heresy which either 
denies or reduces to an absurdity the whole doctrine 
of redemption, that is, Christianity itself, which rests 
on the two articles of faith ; first, the necessity, and 
secondly, the reality of a Redeemer — both articles 
alike incompatible with redemption by a mere man. 

Ibid. B. 88, p. 862. 

And I the rather make the inference &om the preceding 
argument, because of the cognation one hath with the other ; 
for the Apostles did also in the consecration of the Eucharist 
use the Lord's prayer ; and that together with the words 
of institution was the only form of consecration, saith St. 
Gregory ; and St. Jerome affirms, that the Apostles, by the 
command of their Lord, used this prayer in the benediction 
of the elements. 

This section is an instance of impolitic manage- 
ment of a cause, into which Jeremy Taylor was so 
often seduced by the fertility of his intellect and the 
opulence of his erudition. An antagonist by exposing 
the improbability of the tradition (and most impro- 
bable it surely is), and the little credit due to Saint 
Gregory and Saint Jerome (not forgetting a Miltonic 
sneer at their saintship), might draw ofif the attention 
from the unanswerable parts of Taylor's reasoning, 
and leave an impression of his having been confuted. 


Ibid, 8. 89, p. 362. 

But besides this, when the Apostles had received great 
measures of the spirit, and by their gift of prayer composed 
more forms for the help and comfort of the Church, &c. 

Who would not suppose, that the first two lines 
were an admitted point of history, instead of a bare 
conjecture in the form of a bold assertion? 0, 
dearest man ! so excellent a cause did not need such 

Ibid, p. 863. 

And the Fathers of the Council of Antioch complain against 
Paulus Samosatenus, quod Psalmos et carUva, qui ad Domini 
nostri Jesu Chritti honorem decantari aolent, tanquam recentioreSf 
et a virii recerUioris memoricB editos, exploserit. 

This Sam-in-satift-hose, or Paul, the same-as-Satan- 
is, might, I think, have found his confutation in 
Pliny's Letter to Trajan. Carmen Christo, qiuisi 
Deo, dicere secum invicem. 

Ibid. s. 90, p. 864. 

Which together with the r& kirofivrifioyeifMra rwv fcpw^tfTtav, 
the le(Aixmari'wm of the Church, the books of the Apostles and 
Prophets spoken of by Justin Martyr, and said to be used in 
the Christian congregations, are the constituent parts of 

An ingenious but not tenable solution of Justin 
Martyr's airofivrjfwveifiaTa t&v iiroaroKtav, which 
were presumably a Gospel not the same, and yet so 
nearly the same, as our Matthew, that its history and 
character involve one of the hardest problems of 
Christian antiquity. By the by, one cause of the 
small impression— (small in proportion to their vast 
superiority in knowledge and genius) — ^which Jeremy 
Taylor and his compeers made on the religious part 


of the community by their controversial writings 
during the life of Charles I. is to be found in 
their undue predilection for Patristic learning and 
authority. This originated in the wish to baffle the 
Papists at their own weapons ; but it could not 
escape notice, that the latter, though regularly 
beaten, were yet not so beaten, but that they always 
kept the field : and when the same mode of war£Ea*e 
was employed against the Puritans, it was suspected 
as Papistical. 

IHd. 8. 91, pp. 364—6. 

For the offices of prose we find but small mention of them 
in the very first time, save only in general terms, and that 
such there were, and that St. James, St Mark, St. Peter, and 
others of the Apostles and Apostolical men, made Liturgies ; 
and if these which we have at this day were not theirs, yet 
they make probation that these Apostles left others, or else 
they were impudent people that prefixed their names so early, 
and the Churches were very incurious to swallow such a bole 
if no pretension could have been reasonably made for their 

A rash and dangerous argument. 1810. 

A many-edged weapon, which might too readily be 
turned against the common faith by the common 
enemy. For if these Liturgies were rightly attri- 
buted to St. James, St. Mark, St. Peter, and others 
of the Apostles and Apostolical men, how could they 
have been superseded? How could the Church 
have excluded them from the Canon ? But if 
falsely, and yet for a time and at so early an age 
generally believed to have been composed by St. 
James and the rest, it is to be feared that the 
difference will not stop at the point to which Paul of 
Samosata carried it; — a fearful consideration for a 
Christian of the Grotian and Paleyan school. It 


would not, howeyer, shake my nerves, I confess. 
The Epistles of St. Paul, and the Gospel, Epistles, 
and Apocalypse of St. John, contam an evidence of 
their authenticity, which no uncertainty of eccle- 
siastic history, no proof of the frequency and success 
of forgery or ornamental titles (as the Wisdom of 
Solomon) mistaken for matter of fact, can wrest from 
me ; and with these for my guides and sanctions, 
what one article of Christian faith could be taken 
from me, or even unsettled ? It seems to me, as it 
did to Luther, incomparably more probable that the 
eloquent treatise, entitled an Epistle to the Hebrews, 
was written by Apollos than by Paul ; and what 
though it was written by neither? It is demon- 
strable that it was composed before the siege of 
Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple ; and 
scarcely less satisfaxstory is the internal evidence that 
it was composed by an Alexandrian. These two 
data are sufficient to establish the fact, that the 
Pauline doctrine at large was common to all 
Christians at that early period, and therefore the 
faith delivered by Christ. And this is all I want ; 
nor this for my own assurance, but as arming me 
with irrefragable arguments against those psilan- 
thropists who as falsely, as arrogantly, call themselves 
Unitarians, on the one hand ; and against the infidel 
fiction, that Christianity owes its present shape to 
the genius and rabbinical cabala of Paul on the 
other : while at the same time it weakens the more 
important half of the objection to, or doubt con- 
cerning, the authenticity of St. Peter's Epistles. To 
this too I attach a high controversial value (for the 
beauty and excellence of the Epistles themselves are 
not affected by the question) ; and I receive them as 
authentic, for they have all the circumstantial 
evidence that I have any right to expect. But I feel 


how much more genial my conviction would become, 
should I discover, or have pointed out to me, any 
positive internal evidence equivalent to that which 
determines the date of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
or even to that which leaves no doubt on my mind 
that the writer was an Alexandrian Jew. This, my 
dear Lamb, is one of the advantages which the 
previous evidence supplied by the reason and the 
conscience secures for us. We learn what in its 
nature passes all understanding, and what belongs to 
the understanding, and on which, therefore, the 
understanding may and ought to act freely and fear- 
lessly : while those who will admit nothing above 
the understanding (</)pdi;r;fxa capKos), which in its 
nature has no legitimate object but history and out- 
ward phcBnomena, stand in slavish dread like a 
child at its house of cards, lest a single card 
removed may endanger the whole foundationless 
edifice. 1819. 

Ibid. s. 92, p. 365. 

Now here dear Jeremy Taylor begins to be himself 
again; for with all his astonishing complexity, yet 
versatile agility, of powers, he was too good and of 
too catholic a spirit to be a good polemic. Hence he 
so continually is now breaking, now varying, the 
thread of the argument : and hence he is so again and 
again forgetting that he is reasoning against an an- 
tagonist, and falls into conversation with him as a 
friend, — I might almost say, into the literary chit- 
chat and unwithholding frankness of a rich genius 
whose sands are seed-pearl. Of his controversies, 
those against Popery are the most powerful, because 
there he had subtleties and obscure reading to con- 
tend against ; and his wit, acuteness, and omnifarious 
learning found stuff to work on. Those on Original 


Sin are the most eloquent. But in all alike it is the 
digressions, overgrowths, parenthetic obiter et in 
transitu sentences, and, above all, his anthropological 
reflections and experiences — (for example, the inimit- 
able account of a religious dispute, from the first 
collision to the spark, and from the spark to the world 
in flames, in his Dissuasive from Popery), — these 
are the costly gems which glitter, loosely set, on the 
chain armour of his polemic Pegasus, that expands 
his wings chiefly to fly off* from the field of battle, 
the stroke of whose hoof the very rock cannot resist, 
but beneath the stroke of which the opening rock 
sends forth a Hippocreue. The work in which all 
his powers are confluent, in which deep, yet gentle, 
the full stream of his genius winds onward, and still 
forming peninsulas in its winding course — distinct 
parts that are only not each a perfect whole — or in 
less figurative style — (yet what language that does 
not partake of poetic eloquence can convey the cha- 
racteristics of a poet and an orator?) — the work which 
I read with most admiration, but likewise with most 
apprehension and regret, is the Liberty of Prophe- 
sying. If indeed, like some Thessalian drug, or the 
strong herb of Anticyra, 

-that helps and harms, 

Which life and death have sealed with counter charms — 

it could be administered by special prescription, it 
might do good service as a narcotic for zealotry, or a 
solvent for bigotry. 

The substance of the preceding tract may be com- 
prised as follows : — During the period immediately 
following our Lord's Ascension, or the so called 
Apostolic age, all the gifts of the Spirit, and of course 
the gift of prayer, as graces bestowed, not merely or 


principally for the benefit of the Apostles and their 
contemporaries, but likewise and eminently for the 
advantaige of all after-ages, and as means of establishing 
the foundations of Christianity, differed in kind, degree, 
mode, and object, from those ordinary graces promised 
to all true believers of all times ; and possessed a 
character of extraordinary partaking of the nature of 
miracles, to which no believer under the present and 
regular dispensations of the Spirit can make pretence 
without folly and presumption. 

2. Yet it is certain that even the first miraculous 
gifts and graces bestowed on the Apostles themselves 
supervened on, but did not supersede, their natural 
faculties and acquired knowledge, nor enable them to 
dispense with the ordinary means and instruments of 
cultivating the one, and applying the other, by study, 
reading, past experience, and whatever else Pro- 
vidence has appointed for all men as the conditions 
and efficients of moral and intellectual progression. 
The capabilities of deliberating, selecting, and aptly 
disposing of our thoughts and works are God's good 
gifts to man, which the superadded graces of the 
Spirit, vouchsafed to Christians, work on and with, 
call forth and perfect. Therefore deliberation, se- 
lection, and method become duties, inasmuch as they 
are the bases and recipients of the Spirit, even as 
the polished crystal is of the light. But if the 
Prophets and Apostles did not (as Taylor demon- 
strates that they did not) find in miraculous aids any 
such infusions of light as precluded or rendered 
superfluous the exertion of their natural faculties and 
personal attainments, then a fortiori not the pos- 
sessors or legatees of the ordinary graces bequeathed 
by Christ to his Church as the usufructuary property 
of all its members ; and he who wilfully lays aside all 
premeditation, selection, and ordonnance, that he may 


enter unprepared on the highest and most awful 
function of the soul, — that of public prayer, — is guilty 
of no less indecency and irreverence than if, haying 
to present a petition as the representative of a com- 
munity before the throne, he purposely put off his 
seemly garments in order to enter into the presence 
of the monarch naked or in rags : and expects no less 
an absurdity than to become a passive automaton^ in 
which the Holy Spirit is to play the ventriloquist. 

3. If, then, each congregation is to receive a pre- 
pared form of prayer from its head or minister, why 
not rather from the collective wisdom of the Church 
represented in the assembled heads and spiritual 
Fathers ? 

4. This is admitted by implication by the West- 
minster Assembly. But they are not contented with 
the existing form, and therefore substitute for it a 
Directory as the fruits of their meditations and 
counsels. The whole question, then, is now reduced 
to the comparative merits and fitness of the Directory 
and the book of Common Prayer ; and how complete 
the victory of the latter, how glaring the defects, how 
many the deficiences, of the former, Jeremy Taylor 
evinces unanswerably. Such is the substance of this 
Tract. What the author proposed to prove he has 
satisfactorily proved. The faults of the work are : — 
1. The intermixture of weak and strong arguments, 
and the frequent interruption of the stream of his 
logic by doubtful, trifling, and impolitic interruptions; 
arguments resting in premisses denied by the an- 
tagonists, and yet ta]ken for granted ; in short, 
appendages that cumber, accessions that subtract, 
and confirmations that weaken : — 2. That he com- 
mences with a proper division of the subject into 
two distinct branches, that is, extempore prayer as 
opposed to set forms, and. The Directory, as 


prescribing a form opposed to the existing Liturgy ; 
but that in the sequel he blends and confuses and in- 
termingles one with the other, and presses most and 
most frequently on the first point, which a vast 
rojgority of the party he is opposing had disowned 
and reprobated no less than himself, and which, 
though easiest to confute, scarcely required con- 


EpiaUe Dedicatory, p. 403. 

And first I answer, that whatsoever is agamst the foundation 
of faith is out of the limits of my question, and does not 
pretend to compliance or toleration. 

But as all truths hang together, what error is there 
which may not be proved to be against the founda- 
tion of faith ? An inquisitor might make the same 
code of toleration, and in the next moment light the 
faggots around a man who had denied the infallibility 
of Pope and Council. 

im, p. 429. 

Indeed if by a heresy we mean that which is against an 
article of creed, and breaks part of the covenant made be- 
tween Gk)d and man by the mediation of Jesus Christ, I 
grant it to be a very grievous crime, a calling God's veracity 
into question, &c. 

How can he be said to question God's veracity, 
whose belief is that God never declared it, — who 
perhaps disbelieves it, because he thinks it opposite 
to God's honor? For example: — Original sin, in 
the literal sense of the article, was held by both 
Papists and Protestants (with exception of the 


Sociuians) as the fuDdamental article of Christianity; 
and yet our Jeremy Taylor himself attacked and 
reprobated it. Why? because he thought it dis- 
honored God. Why may not another man believe 
the same of the Incarnation, and affirm that it is 
equal to a circle assuming the essence of a square, 
and yet remaining a circle ? But so it is ; we spoil 
our cause, because we dare not plead it in toto ; and 
a half truth serves for a proof of the opposite false- 
hood. Jeremy Taylor dared not carry his argument 
into all its consequences. 

S. 1, p. 443. 

Of the nature of fSEiith, and that its duty is completed in 
believing the articles of the Apostles* creed. 

This section is for the most part as beautifully 
written as it was charitably conceived ; yet how vain 
the attempt ! Jeremy Taylor ought to have denied 
that Christian faith is at all intellectual primarily, 
but only probably ; as, ccBteris paribus, it is probable 
that a man with a pure heart will believe an intelli- 
gent Creator. But the faith resides in the predis- 
posing purity of heart, that is, in the obedience of the 
will to the uncorrupted conscience. For take Taylor's 
instances ; and I ask whether the words or the sense 
be meant? Surely the latter. Well then, I under- 
stand, and so did the dear Bishop, by these texts the 
doctrine of a Eedeemer, who by his agonies of death 
actually altered the relations of the spirits of all men 
to their Maker, redeemed them from sin and death 
eternal, and brought life and immortality into the 
world. But the Socinian uses the same texts ; and 
means only that a good and gifted teacher of pure 


morality died a martyr to his opinions, and by his 
resurrection proved the possibility of all men rising 
from the dead. He did nothing; — ^he only taught 
and afforded evidence. Can two more diverse opinions 
be conceived ? God here; mere man there. Here a 
redeemer from guilt and corruption, and a satisfaction 
for offended holiness ; there a mere declarer that God 
imputed no guilt wherever, with or without Christ, 
the person had repented of it. What could Jeremy 
Taylor say for the necessity of his sense (which is 
mine) but what might be said for the necessity of 
the Nicene Creed ? And then as to Rom. x. 9, how 
can the text mean anything, unless we know what 
St. Paul implied in the words the Lord Jems, From 
other parts of his writings we know that he meant by 
the word Lord his divinity or at least essential super- 
humanity. But the Socinian will not allow this ; or, 
allowing it, denies St. Paulas authority in matters of 
speculative faith. As well then might I say, it is 
sufficient for you to believe and repeat the words 
forte miles reddens ; and though one of you mean 
by it * Perhaps I may be balloted for the militia,' 
and the other understands it to mean, that ' Beading 
is forty miles from London,' you are still co-symbolists 
and believers! While a third person may say, I 
believe, but do not comprehend, the words ; that is, 
I believe that the person who first used them meant 
something that is true, — ^what I do not know ; that is, 
I believe his veracity. 

O ! had this work been published when Charles I., 
Archbishop Laud, whose chaplain Taylor was, and 
the other Star Chamber inquisitors, were sentencing 
Prynne, Bastwick, Leighton, and others, to punish- 
ments that have left a brand-mark on the Church of 
England, the sophistry might have been forgiven for 
the sake of the motive, which would then have been 


unquestionable. Or if Jeremy Taylor had not in 
effect retracted after the Restoration ; — if he had not, 
as soon as the Church had gained its power, most 
basely disclaimed and disavowed the principle of tole- 
ration, and apologised for the publication by declaring 
it to have been a ruse de guerre^ currjring pardon for 
his past liberalism by charging, and most probably 
slandering himself with the guilt of fcdsehood, 
treachery, and hypocrisy, his character as a man would 
at least have been stainless. Alas, alas, most dearly do 
I love Jeremy Taylor ; most religiously do I venerate 
his memory ! But this is too foul a blotch of leprosy 
to be forgiven. He who pardons such an act in such 
a man partakes of its guilt. 

lUd. 8. 7, p. 346—7. 

In the pursuance of this great truth, the Apostles, or the 
holy men their contemporaries and disciples, composed a 
creed to be a rule of faith to all Christians ; as appears in 
Irenaeus, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Austin, RufEbaus, and 
divers others ; which creed, imless it had contained all the 
entire object of faith, and the foundation of rehgion, &c. 

Jeremy Taylor does not appear to have been a cri- 
tical scholar. His reading had been oceanic ; but he 
read rather to bring out the growths of his own fertile 
and teeming mind than to inform himself respecting 
the products of those of other men. Hence his 
reliance on the broad assertions of the Fathers ; yet it 
is strange that he should have been ignorant that the 
Apostles* Creed was growing piecemeal for several 

IHd. p. 447. 

All catechumens in the Latin Church coming to baptism 
were interrogated concerning their faith, and gave satisfaction 
on the recitation of this Creed. 



I very much doubt this, and rather believe that our 
present Apostles* Creed was no more than the first 
instruction of the catechumens prior to baptism ; and 
(as I conclude from Eusebius) that at baptism they 
professed a more mysterious faith ;— the one being 
the milk, the other the strong meat. Where is the 
proof that TertuUian "was speaking of this Creed? 
Eusebius speaks in as high terms of the Symbolum 
Fideit and, defending himself against charges of 
heresy, says, ** Did I not at my baptism, in the Sym- 
bolum Fideit declare my belief in Christ as God and 
the co-eternal Word?"* The true Creed it was impiety 
to write down ; but such was never the case with the 
present or initiating Creed. Strange, too, that Jeremy 
Taylor, who has in this very work written so divinely 
of tradition, should assume as a certainty that this 
Creed was in a proper sense Apostolic. Is then the 
Creed of greater authority than the inspired Scrip- 
tures ? And can words in the Creed be more express 
than those of St. Paul to the Colossians, speaking of 
Christ as the creative mind of his Father, before all 
worlds, begotten before all things created? 

Ibid, s. 10, p. 449. 

This paragraph is indeed a complexion, as Taylor 
might call it, of sophisms. Thus ; — ^unbelief from 
want of information or capacity, though with the dis- 
position of faith, is confounded with disbelief. The 
question is not, whether it may not be safe for a man 
to believe simply that Christ is his Saviour, but whe- 
ther it be safe for a man to disbelieve the article in 
any sense which supposes an essential supra-humanity 
in Christ, — ^any sense that would not have been equally 
applicable to John, had God chosen to raise him 
instead of his cousin ? 


Ibid. 8. 11, p. 460. 

Neither are we obliged to make these Articles more par- 
ticular and minute than the Creed. For since the Apostles, 
and indeed our blessed Lord himself, promised heaven to 
them who believed him to be the Christ that was to come 
into the world, and that he who believes in him should be 
partaker of the resurrection and life eternal, he will be as 
good as his word. Tet because this article was very general, 
and a complexion rather than a single proposition, the 
Apostles and others our Fathers in Christ did make it more 
explicit : and though they have said no more than what lay 
entire and ready formed in the bosom of the great Article, 
yet they made their extracts to great purpose and absolute 
sufficiency ; and therefore there needs no more deductions, 
or remoter consequences from the first great Article than 
the Creed of the Apostles. 

Most true ; but still the question returns, what 
was meant by the phrase the Christ? Contraries 
cannot both be true. The Christ could not be both 
mere man and incarnate God. One or the other 
must believe falsely on this great key-stone of all the 
intellectual faith in Christianity. For so it is ; alter 
it, and everything alters; as is proved in Trinita- 
rianism and Socinianism. No two religions can be 
more different ; I know of no two equally so. 

lbid.B. 12, p. 461. 

The Church hath power to intend our faith, but not to 
extend it : to make our belief more evident, but not more 
large and comprehensive. 

This and the preceding pages are scarcely honest. 

For Jeremy Taylor begins with admitting that the 

Creed might have been composed by others. He has 

no proof of that most absurd fable of the twelve 

Apostles clubbing to make it ; yet here all he says 

assumes its inspiration aa a certain fact^ 

p 2 


Ihid. p. 454. 

But for the present there is no insecurity in ending there 
where the Apostles ended, in building where they built, in 
resting where they left us, unless the same infallibility which 
they had had still continued, which I think I shall hereafter 
make evident it did not. 

What a tangle of contradictions Taylor thrusts 
himself into by the attempt to support a true system, 
a full third of which he was afraid to mention, and 
another third was by the same fear induced to deny 
— at least to take for granted the contrary : for 
example, the absolute plenary inspiration and infalli- 
bility of the Apostles and Evangelists ; and yet that 
their whole function, as far as the consciences of their 
followers were concerned, was to repeat the two or 
three sentences, that Jesvis was Christ (so says one of 
the Evangelists), the Christ of God (so says another), 
the Christ the Son of the living God (so says a third), 
that he rose from the dead, and for the remission of 
sins, to as many as believed and professed that he 
was the Christ or the Lord, and died and rose for the 
remission of sins. Surely no miraculous communi- 
cation of God's infallibility was necessary for this. 
But if this infallibility was stamped on all they said 
and wrote, is it credible that any part should not be 
equally binding ? I declare I can make nothing out 
of this section, but that it is necessary for men to 
believe the Apostles' Creed ; but what they believe by 
it is of no consequence. For instance ; what if I 
chose to understand by the word * dead ' a state of 
trance or suspended animation ; — language furnishing 
plenty of analogies — dead in a swoon — dead drunk — 
and so on ; — should I still be a Christian ? * Born of 
the Virgin Mary.* What if, as Priestley and others, 
I interpreted it as if we should say, * the former Miss 
Vincent was his mother.* I need not say that I dis- 


agree with Taylor's premisses only because they are 
not broad enough, and with his aim and principsil con- 
clusion only because it does not go far enough. I 
would have the law grounded wholly in the present 
life, religion only on the life to come. Religion is 
debased by temporal motives, and law rendered the 
drudge of prejudice and passion by pretending to. 
spiritual aims. But putting this aside, and judging 
of this work solely as a chain of reasoning, I seem to 
find one leading error in it; namely, that Taylor 
takes the condition of a first admission into the 
Church of Christ for the fulness of faith which was 
to be gradually there acquired. The simple acknow- 
ledgment, that they accepted Christ as their Lord 
and King, was the first lisping of the infant believer 
at which the doors were opened, and he began the 
process of growth in the faith. 

Ibid. s. 2, p. 457. 

The great heresy that troubled them was the doctrine of 
the necessity of keeping the law of Moses, the necessity of 
circumcision, against which doctrine they were therefore 
zealous, because it was a direct overthrow to the very end 
and excellency of Christ's coming. 

The Jewish converts were still bound to the rite 
of circumcision, not indeed as under the Law, or by 
the covenant of works, but as the descendants of 
Abraham, and by that especial covenant which St. 
Paul rightly contends was a covenant of grace and 
faith. But the heresy consisted wholly in the attempt 
to impose this obligation on the Gentile converts, in 
the infatuation of some of the Galatians, who, having 
no pretension to be descendants of Abraham, could, 
as the Apostle urges, only adopt the rite as binding 
themselves under the law of works, and thereby 


apostatising from the covenant of faith hy free grace. 
And this was the decision of the Apostolic Council 
at Jerusalem. Acta xv. Rhenferd, in his Treatise on 
the Ebionites and other pretended heretics in Pales- 
tine, so grossly and so ignorantlj calumniated by 
Epiphanius, has written excellently well on this sub- 
ject. Jeremy Taylor is mistaken throughout. 

lUd, s. 4, p. 459. 
And 80 it was in this great question of circumcision. 

It is really wonderful that a man like Bishop 
Taylor could have read the New Testament, and have 
entertained a doubt as to the decided opinion of all 
the Apostles, that every bom Jew was bound to be 
circumcised. Opinion ? The very doubt never sug- 
gested itself. When something like this opinion was 
slanderously attributed to Paul, observe the almost 
ostentatious practical contradiction of the calumny 
which was adopted by him at the request and by the 
advice of the other Apostles. {Actsxxi, 21-26.) The 
rite of circumcision, I say, was binding on all the 
descendants of Abraham through Isaac for all time 
even to the end of the world ; but the whole law of 
Moses was binding on the Jewish Christians till the 
heaven and the earth — that is, the Jewish priesthood 
and the state — had passed away in the destruction of 
the temple and city ; and the Apostles observed every 
tittle of the law. 

IHd, a. 6, p. 460. 
The heresy of the Nicolaitans. 

Heresy is not a proper term for a plainly anti- 
Christian sect. Nicolaitans is the literal Greek trans- 
lation of Balaamites ; destroyers of the people. Rev, 
ii. 14, 15. 


Ibid. s. 8, p. 461. 

For heresy is not an error of the understanding, but an 
error of the will. 

Most excellent. To this Taylor should have ad- 
hered, and to its converse. Faith is not an accuracy 
of logic, but a rectitude of heart. 

IHd. p. 462. 

It was the heresy of the Gnostics, that it was no matter 
how men lived, so they did but believe aright* 

I regard the extinction of all the writings of the 
Gnostics among the heaviest losses of Ecclesiastical 
literature. We have only the account of their inve- 
terate enemies. Individual madmen there have been 
in all ages, but I do not believe that any sect of 
Gnostics ever held this opinion in the sense here 


And, indeed, if we remember that St. Paul reckons heresy 
amongst the works of the flesh, and ranks it with all manner 
of practical impieties, we shall easily perceive that if a man 
mingles not a vice with his opinion, —if he be innocent in his 
life, though deceived in his doctrine, — his error is his misery 
not his crime ; it makes him an argument of weakness and 
an object of pity, but not a person sealed up to ruin and 

O admirable 1 How could Taylor, after this, preach 
and publish his Sermon in defence of persecution, at 
least against toleration ! 

Ibid. 8. 22, p. 479. 
Ebion, Manes. 

No such man as Ebion ever, as I can see, existed;* 
and Manes is rather a doubtful em. 

• See Euseb. Hiat. iii. 27.— £i. 


Jhid, 8. 31. p. 487, 

But I shall observe this, that although the Nicene Fathers 
in that case, at that time, and in that conjuncture of circum- 
stances, did well, &o. 

What Bull and Waterland have urged in defence 
of the Nicene Fathers is (like everything else from 
such men) most worthy of all attention. They con- 
tend that no other term but 6fjioov<rCa could secure 
the Christian faith against both the two contrary 
errors, Tritheism with subversion of the unity of the 
Godhead on the one hand, and creature-worship on 
the other. For, to use Waterland's mode of argu- 
ment,* either Eusebius of Nicomedia, with the four 
other dissenters at Nice, were right or wrong in their 
assertion, that Christ could not be of the ova-Ca of the 
self-originated First by derivation, as a son from a 
father : — if they were right, they either must have 
discovered some third distinct and intelligible form of 
origination in addition to begotten and created, or they 
had not and could not. Now the latter was notori- 
ously the fact. Therefore to deny the ofMoovcrCa was 
implicitly to deny the generation of the second Person, 
and thus to assert his creation. But if he was a 
creature, he could not be adorable without idolatry. 
Nor did the chain of inevitable consequences stop 
here. His characteristic functions of Redeemer, Me- 
diator, King, and final Judge, must all cease to be 
attributable to Christ ; and the conclusion is, that 
between the Homoousian scheme and mere Psilan- 
thropism there is no intelligible medium. If this, 
then, be not a fundamental article of faith, what 
can be? 

To this reasoning I really can discern no fair reply 
within the sphere of conceptual logic, if it can be made 
evident that the term ojjloovo-los is really capable of 

* Vindication, &e, Quer. 13, 14, 16.— iSi. 


achieving the end here set forth. One objection to 
the term is, that it was not translatable into the lan- 
guage of the Western Church. Consubstantial is 
not the translation : substantia answers to vTroorao-ts, 
not to ovaCa ; and hence, when vTroorao-is was used 
by the Nicene Fathers in distinction from ova-Ca, the 
Latin Church was obliged to render it by some other 
word, and thus introduced that most unhappy and 
improper term persona. Would you know my own 
inward judgment on this question, it is this : first, 
that this pregnant idea, the root and form of all ideas, 
is not within the sphere of conceptual logic, — that is, 
of the understanding, — and is therefore of necessity 
inexpressible ; for no idea can be adequately repre- 
sented in words : — secondly, that I agree with Bull 
and Waterland against Bishop Taylor, that there was 
need of a public and solemn decision on this point : 
but, lastly, that I am more than doubtful respecting 
the fitness or expediency of the term ofxoovcrLoSi and 
hold that the decision ought to have been negative. 
For at first all parties agreed in the positive point, 
namely, that Christ was the Son of God, and that the 
Son of God was truly God, " or very God of very 
God." All that was necessary to be added was, that 
the only begotten Son of God was not created nor 
begotten in time. More than this might be possible, 
and subject of insight ; but it was not determinable 
by words, and was therefore to be left among the 
rewards of the Spirit to the pure in heart in inward 
vision and silent contemplation. 

Ibid. s. 40, p. 495. 

All that is necessary to give a full and satisfactory 
import to this excellent paragraph, and to secure it 
from all inconvenient consequences, is to understand 


the distinction between the objective and general 
revelation, by which the whole Church is walled 
around and kept together (principium totalitatis et 
cohasionis), and the subjective revelation, the light 
from the life {Johni. 4.), by which the individual 
believers, each according to the grace given, grow in 
faith. For the former, the Apostles' Creed, in its 
present form, is more than enough ; for the latter, 
it might be truly said in the words of the fourth 
Gospel, that all the books which the world could 
contain, would not suffice to set forth explicitly that 
mystery in which ell treasures of knowledge are 
hidden, reconduntur. 

From the Apostles' Creed, nevertheless, if regarded 
in the former point of view, several clauses must be 
struck out, not as false, but as not necessary. ** I 
believe that Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified 
under Pontius Pilate, rose from the dead on the third 
day ; and I receive him as the Christ, the Son of the 
living God, who died for the remission of the sins 
of as many as believe in the Father through him, in 
whom we have the promise of life everlasting.'* This 
is the sufficient creed. More than this belongs to 
the Catechism, and then to the study of the 

Ihid, 8. 6, p. 506. 

So did the ancient Papias understand Christ's millenary 
reign upon earth, and so depressed the hopes of Christianity 
and their desires to the longing and expectation of temporal 
pleasures and satisfactions. And he was followed by Justin 
Martyr, Irenseus, TertuUian, Lactantius, and indeed, the 
whole Church generally, till St. Austin and St. Jerome's 
time, who, first of any whose works are extant, did reprove 
the error. 

Bishop Taylor is, I think, mistaken in two points ; 


first, that the Catholic Millenaries looked forward to 
carnal pleasures in the kingdom of Christ ; — for even 
the Jewish Rabbis of any note represented the 
Millenium as the preparative and transitional state 
to perfect spiritualisation : — second, that the doctrine 
of Christ's reign upon earth rested wholly or prin- 
cipally on the twentieth chapter of the Revelations, 
which actually, in my judgment, opposes it. 

I more than suspect that Austin's and Jerome's 
strongest ground for rejecting the second coming of 
our Lord in his kingly character, was, that they were 
tired of waiting for it. How can we otherwise inter- 
pret the third and fourth clauses of the Lord's 
Prayer, or, perhaps, the iv T<a KaLp<a rovTto, in hoc 
seculo, (x. 30) of St. Mark? If the first three 
Gospels, joined with the unbroken faith and tradition 
of the Church for nearly three centuries, can decide 
the question, the Millenarians have the best of the 

Vol. VIII. 8. 9, p. 22. 

One thing only I observe (and we shall find it true in most 
writings, whose authority is urged in questions of theology), 
that the authority of the tradition is not it which moves the 
assent, but the nature of the thing ; and because such a canon 
is delivered, they do not therefore believe the sanction or 
proposition so delivered, but disbelieve the tradition if they 
do not like the matter, and so do not judge of the matter by 
the tradition, but of the tradition by the matter. 

This just and acute remark is, in fact, no less 
applicable to Scripture in all doctrinal points, and if 
infidelity is not to overspread England as well as 
France, the same criterion (that is, the internal 
evidence) must be extended to all points, to the 
narratives no less than to the precept. The written 
words must be tried by the Word from the beginning. 


in which is h'fe, and that life the light of men. 
Reduce it to the noetic pentad, or universal form of 
contemplation, except where all the terms are abso- 
lute, and consequently there 13 no punctum indifferenSy 
— in divinis tetras, in omnibus aliis pentas, and the 
form stands thus.* 

Ibid. a. 3, p. 36. 

So that it cannot make it divine and necessary to be heartily 
believed. It may make' it lawful, not make it true ; that is, it 
may possibly, by such means, become a law, but not a truth. 

This is a sophism which so evident a truth did 
not need. Apply the reasoning to an Act of Par- 
liament previously to the royal sanction. Will it 
hold good to say, if it was law after the sanction, it 
was law before ? The assertion of the Papal theo- 
logians is, that the divine providence may possibly 
permit even the majority of a legally convened 
Council to err; but by force of a divine promise 
cannot permit both a majority and the Pope to err 
on the same point. The flaw in this is, that the 
Pwomish divines rely on a conditional promise uncon- 
ditionally. To Taylor's next argument the Romish 
respondent would say, that an exception, grounded 
on a specific evident necessity, does not invalidate 
the rule in the absence of any equally evident 

Taylor's argument is a /xera/3aa-ts els aXXo yivos. 
It is not the truth, but the sign or mark, by which 
the Church at large may know that it is truth, which 
is here provided for ; that is, not the truth simply, 
but the obligation of receiving it as such. Ten 
thousand may apprehend the latter, only ten of 
whom might be capable of determining the former. 

* See the form previously exhibited in this volume, p. ^.—Ed. 


Ibid, 5. 

So that now (that we may apply this) thete are seven 
general Councils, which by the Church of Rome are con- 
demned of error. * * * The council of Arimimmi, con- 
sisting of six hundred Bishops. 

It is the mark of a faction that it never hesitates 
to sacrifice a greater good common to them and to 
their opponents to a lesser advantage obtained over 
those opponents. Never was there a stranger instance 
of imprudence, at least, than the act of the Atha- 
nasian party in condemning so roundly the great 
Council of Ariminum as heretical, and for little 
more than the charitable wish of the many hundred 
Bishops there assembled to avoid a word that had 
set all Christendom by the ears. They declared that 
6 ay€vvr)Tos Trarryp, kou 6 ayjpovoas yevvrjrbs vlbs, 
Koi TO TTvevfia iKiropeuofxevov were substantially 
(vTroorariKcos) distinct, but nevertheless, one God ; 
and though there might be some incautious phrases 
used by them, the good Bishops declared that if their 
decree was indeed Arian, or introduced aught to the 
derogation of the Son's absolute divinity, it was 
against their knowledge and intention, and that they 
renounced it. 

Ibid. s. 10, p. 46. 

Gratian says, that the Council means by a concubine a wife 
married sme dote et solennitcUe; but this is daubing with 
untempered mortar. 

Here I think Taylor wrong and Gratian right ; 
for not a hundred years ago the very same decree 
was passed by the Lutheran clergy in Prussia, deter- 
mining that left-hand marriages were to be discou- 
raged, but did not exclude from communion. These 
marriages were invented for the sake of poor nobles : 


they could have hut that one wife, and the children 
followed the rank and title of the mother, not of the 

Ibid, 8. 7, p. 56. 

Thirdly ; for pasce oves, there is litUe in that allegation 
besides the boldness of the objectors. 

I have ever thought that the derivation of the 
Papal monarchj from the thrice repeated command, 
pasce oves, the most brazen of all the Pope's bulls. 
It was because Peter had given too good proof that 
he was more disposed to draw the sword for Christ 
than to perform the humble duties of a shepherd, 
that our Lord here strongly, though tenderly, 
reminds him of his besetting temptation. The words 
are most manifestly a reproof and a warning, not a 
commission. In like manner the very letter of the 
famous paronomastic text proves that Peter's con- 
fession, not Peter himself, was the rock. His name 
was, perhaps, not so much stone as stoner ; not so 
much rock as rockman; and Jesus hearing this 
unexpected confession of his mysterious Sonship (for 
this is one of the very few cases in which the internal 
evidence decides for the superior fidelity of the first 
Gospel), and recognising in it an immediate revelation 
from heaven, exclaims, ** Well, art thou the man of 
the rock; and upon this rock will I build my church^'' 
not on this man. Add too, that the law revealed to 
Moses and the confession of the divine attributes, 
are named the rock, both in the Pentateuch and in 
the PsEilms. 

Mark has simply. Thou art the Christ ; Luke, The 
Christ of God;* but that Jesus was the Messiah 
had long been known by the Apostles, at all events 

• Jtforik Yiii. 29. Luhe ix,20.'-Ed. 


conjectured. Had not John so declared him at 
the baptism ? Besides, it was included among the 
opinions concerning our Lord which led to his ques* 
tion, the aim of which was not simply as to the 
Messiahship, but that the Messiah, instead of a mere 
descendant of David, destined to re-establish and 
possess David's throne, was the Jehovah himself, 
the Son of the living God; God manifested in the 
flesh, 1 Tim. iii. 16. 

Ibid. 8. 8, p. 62. 

And yet again, another degree of uncertainty is, to whom 
the Bishops of Home do succeed. For St. Paul was as much 
Bishop of Rome as St Peter was ; there he presided, there he 
preached, and he it was that was the doctor of the imcircum- 
cision and of the Gentiles, St. Peter of the circumcision and of 
the Jews only ; and therefore the converted Jews at Rome 
might with better reason claim the privilege of St. Peter, than 
the Romans and the Churches in her communion, who do 
not derive from Jewish parents. 

I wonder that Taylor should have introduced so 
very strong an argument merely obiter. If St. Peter 
ever was at Rome, it must have been for the Jewish 
converts or convertendi exclusively, and on what do 
the earliest Fathers rest the fact of Peter's being at 
Rome ? Do they appeal to any document ? No ; but 
to their own arbitrary and most improbable interpre- 
tation of the word Babylon in St. Peter's first epistle.* 
I am too deeply impressed with the general difficulty 
arising out of the strange eclipse of all historic docu- 
ments, of all particular events, from the arrival of 
St. Paul at Rome as related by St. Luke and the 
time when Justin Martyr begins to shed a scanty 
light, to press any particular instance of it. Yet, if 
Peter really did arrive at Rome, and was among 

• 1 Bst. V. lS.—EeL 


those destroyed by Nero, it is strange that the Bishop 
and Church of Rome should have preserved no record 
of the particulars. 

IbicL B. 16, p. 71. 

But what shall we think of that decretal of Gregory the 
Third, who wrote to Boniface his legate in Germany, quod 
illi, quorum vaores inifirmitate aliqua morbida debitum reddere 
noluerunt, edits poterarU nubere. 

Supposing the noluerunt to nlean nequeunt, or at 
least any state of mind and feeling that does not 
exclude moral attachment, I, as a Protestant, abomi- 
nate this decree of Gregory III. ; for I place the 
moral, social, and spiritual helps and comforts as the 
proper and essential ends of Christian marriage, and 
regard the begetting of children as a contingent con- 
sequence. But on the contrary tenet of the Romish 
Church, I do not see how Gregory could consistently 
decree otherwise. 

Ihid, 8. 3, p. 82. 

Nor that Origeu taught the pains of hell not to have an 
eternal duration. 

And yet there can be no doubt that Taylor himself 
held with Origen on this point. But, non licebat 
dogmatizare oppositum, quia determinatum fuerat. 

Ibid. p. 84. 

And except it be in the Apostles' Creed and articles of such 
nature, there is nothing which may with any color be called 
a consent, much less tradition universal. 

It may be well to remember, whenever Taylor 
speaks of the Apostles' Creed, that Pearson's work 
on that Creed was not then published. Nothing is 



more suspicious than copies of creeds in the early 
Fathers ; it was so notoriously the custom of the 
transcribers to make them square with those in use 
in their own time. 

Ibid. s. 4. 

Such as makes no invasion upon their great reputation, 
which I desire should be preserved as sacred as it ought. 

The vision of the mitre dawned on Taylor; and 
his recollection of Laud came to the assistance of the 
Fathers; of many of whom in his heart Taylor, I 
think, entertained a very mean opinion. How could 
such a man do otherwise ? I could forgive them their 
nonsense and even their economical falsehoods ; but 
their insatiable appetite for making heresies, and 
thus occasioning the neglect or destruction of so 
many valuable works, Origen's for instance, this I 
cannot forgive or forget. 

Ibid. s. 1, p. 88. 

Of the incompetency of the Church, in its diflfusive capacity, 
to be judge of controversies ; and the impertinency of that 
pretence of the Spirit. 

Now here begin my serious diflferences with Jeremy 
Taylor, which may be characterised in one sentence ; 
ideas versus conceptions and images. I contend that 
the Church in the Christian sense is an idea ; — not 
therefore a chimera, or a fancy, but a real being and 
a most powerful reality. Suppose the present state 
of science in this country, with this only difference 
that the Royal and other scientific societies were not 
founded: might I not speak of a scientific public, 
and its influence on the community at large? Or 
should I be talking of a chimera, a shadow, or a 

VOL. I. Q 


non-entity ? Or when we speak with honest pride of 
the public spirit of this country as the power which 
supported the nation through the gigantic conflict 
with France, do we speak of nothing, because we 
cannot say, — " It is in this place or in that catalogue 
of names ? " At the same time I most readily admit 
that no rule can be grounded formally on the sup- 
posed assent of this ideal Church, the members of 
which are recorded only in the book of life at any 
one moment. In Taylor's use and application of the 
term, Church, the visible Christendom, and in reply 
to the Romish divines, his arguments are irrefragable. 

lUd. 8. 2, p. 93. 

So that if they read, study, pray, search records, and use 
all the means of art and industry in the pursuit of truth, it 
is not with a resolution to follow that which shall seem truth 
to them, hut to confirm what before they did believe. 

Alas, if Protestant and Papist were named by 
individuals answering or not answering to this de- 
scription, what a vast accession would not the Pope's 
muster-roll receive ! In the instance of the Council 
of Trent, the iniquity of the Emperor and the Kings 
of France and Spain consisted in their knowledge 
that the assembly at Trent had no pretence to be a 
general Council, that is, a body representative of the 
Catholic or even of the Latin Church. It may be, 
and in fact it is, very questionable whether any 
Council, however large and fairly chosen, is not an 
absurdity except under the universal faith that the 
Holy Ghost miraculously dictates all the decrees : 
and this is irrational, where the same superseding 
Spirit does not afford evidence of its presence by 
producing unanimity. I know nothing, if I may so 
say, more ludicrous than the supposition of the Holy 


Ghost contenting himself with a majority, in ques- 
tions respecting faith, or decrees binding men to 
inward belief, which again binds a Christian to 
outward profession. Matters of discipline and cere- 
mony, having peace and temporal order for their 
objects, are proper enough for a Council ; but these 
do not need any miraculous interference. Still if any 
Council is admitted in matters of doctrine, those who 
have appealed to it must abide by the determination 
of the majority, however they might prefer the opinion 
of the minority, just as in acts of Parliament, 

Ibid. s. 11, p. 98. 

Of some causes of error in the exercise of reason, which 
are inculpate in themselves. 

It is a lamentable misuse of the term, reason, — 
thus to call by that name the mere faculty of 
guessing and babbling. The making reason a faculty, 
instead of a light, and using the term as a mere 
synonyme of the understanding, and the consequent 
ignorance of the true nature of ideas, and that none 
but ideas are objects of faith — ^are the grounds of all 
Jeremy Taylor's important errors. 


But men may understand what they please^ especially 
when they are to expound oracles. 

If this sentence had occurred in Hume or Voltaire I 

Ibid, 8. 3, p. 103. 

And then if ever truth be afflicted, she shall also be 

Here and in many other passages of his other 



works Jeremy Taylor very unfairly states this argu- 
ment of the anti-prelatic party. It was not that the 
Church of England was afflicted (the Puritans them- 
selves had been much more afflicted by the prelates) ; 
but that having appealed to the decision of the 
sword, the cause was determined against it. But in 
fact it is false . that the Puritans ever did argue as 
Taylor represents them. Laud and his confederates 
had begun by incarcerating, scourging, and inhumanly 
mutilating their fellow Christians for not acceding to 
their fancies, and proceeded to goad and drive the 
King to levy or at least maintain war against his 
Parliament : and the Parliamentary party very 
naturally cited their defeat and the overthrow of the 
prelacy as a judgment on their blood-thirstiness, not 
as a proof of their error in questions of theology. 

Ibid. 8. 4, p. 105. 
All that I shall say, &c adfinem. 

An admirable paragraph. Taylor is never more 
himself, never appears greater, or wiser, than when 
he enters on this topic, namely, the many and various 
causes beside truth which occasion men to hold an 
opinion for truth. 

Ibid, s. 7, p. 111. 

Of such men as these it was said by St. Aiistin : Cateram 
twbam non intelligendi vivacitas, sed credendi avmplicitcu 
tviisaimam facit. 

Such charity is indeed notable policy : salvation 
made easy for the benefit of obedient dupes. 

Ibid, s. 2, p. 119. 

I deny not but certain and known idolatry, oi^ any other 
sort of practical impiety with its principdant doctrine, may 


be punished corporally, because it is no other but matter 
of fact. 

In the Jewish theocracy, I admit ; because the fact 
of idolatry was a crime, namely, crimen Icesm majes- 
tatis, an overt act subversive of the fundamental law 
of the state, and breaking asunder the vinculum et 
copulam unitatis et cohcBsionis, But in making the 
position general, Taylor commits the sophisma omissi 
essentialis ; he omits the essential of the predicate, 
namely, criminal ; — not its being a fact rendering it 
punishable, hut its being a criminal fact. 

Ibid. s. 3. 

Oh that this great and good man, who saw and has 
expressed so large a portion of the truth, — (if by the 
Creed I might understand the true Apostles', that is, 
the Baptismal Creed, free from the additions of the 
first five centuries, I might indeed say the whole 
truth), — had but brought it back to the great original 
end and purpose of historical Christianity, and of the 
Church visible, as its exponent, not as a hortus siccus 
of past revelations, — but an ever enlarging inclosed 
ai^ea of the opportunity of individual conversion to, 
and reception of, the spirit of truth ! Then, instead 
of using this one truth to inspire a despair of all 
truth, a recldess scepticism vnthin, and a boundless 
compliance without, he would have directed the 
believer to seek for light where there was a certainty 
of finding it, as far as it was profitable for him, that 
is, as far as it actually was light for him. The 
visible Church would be a walled Academy, a plea- 
sure garden, in which the intrants having presented 
their symboluvn porta, or admission-contract, walk at 
large, each seeking private audience of the invisible 
teacher, — alone now, now in groups, — meditating or 


conversing, — gladly listening to some elder disciple, 
through whom (as ascertained by his intelligibility to 
me) I feel that the common Master is speaking to 
me,— or lovingly communing with a class-fellow, who, 
I have discovered, has received the same lesson from 
the inward teaching with myself, — while the only 
public concerns in which all, as a common weal, 
exercised control and vigilance over each, are order, 
peace, mutual courtesy and reverence, kindness, 
charity, love, and the fealty and devotion of all and 
each to the common Master and Benefactor ! 

Ibid. B, 8, p. 124. 

It is characteristic of the man and the age, 
Taylor's high-strained reverential epithets to the 
names of the Fathers, and as rare and naked mention 
of Luther, Melancthon, Calvin — the least of whom 
was not inferior to St. Augustin, and worth a brigade 
of the Cyprians, Firmilians, and the like. And 
observe, always Saint Cyprian ! 

Ibid. s. 12, pp. 128-9. 

Gibbon's enumeration of the causes, not miraculous, 
of the spread of Christianity during the first three 
centuries is far from complete. This, however, is 
not the greatest defect of this celebrated chapter. 
The proportions of importance are not truly assigned ; 
nay, the most effective causes are only not omitted — 
mentioned, indeed, but quasi in transitu, not deve- 
loped or distinctly brought out : for example, the 
zealous despotism of the CsBsars, with the consequent 
exclusion of men of all ranks from the great interests 
of the public weal, otherwise than as servile instru- 
ments ; in short, the direct contrary of that state and 


character of men's minds, feelings, hopes and fancies, 
which elections, Parliaments, Parliamentary reports, 
and newspapers produce in England ; and this 
extinction of patriotism aided by the melting down 
of states and nations in the one vast yet heterogene- 
ous Empire ; — the number and variety of the parts 
acting only to make each insignificant in its own 
eyes, and yet sufl&cient to preclude all living interest 
in the peculiar institutions and religious forms of 
Rome ; which beginning in a petty district, had, no 
less than the Greek republics, its mythology and 
6prj(rK€Ca intimately connected with localities and 
local events. The mere habit of staring or laughing 
at nine religions must necessarily end in laughing 
at the tenth, that is, the religion of the man's own 
birth-place. The first of these causes, that is, the 
detachment of all love and hope from the things of 
the visible world, and from temporal objects not 
merely selfish, must have produced in thousands a 
tendency to, and a craving after, an internal religion, 
while the latter occasioned an absolute necessity of a 
mundane as opposed to a national or local religion. 
I am far from denying or doubting the influence of 
the excellence of the Christian faith in the propa- 
gation of the Christian Church or the power of its 
evidences ; but still I am persuaded that the neces- 
sity of some religion, and the untenable nature and 
obsolete superannuated character of all the others, 
occasioned the conversion of the largest though not 
the worthiest part of the new-made Christians. 
Here, though exploded in physics, we have recourse 
to the horror vacui as an efl&cient cause. This view 
of the subject can offend or startle those only who, 
in their passion for wonderment, virtually exclude the 
agency of Providence from any share in the realising 
of its own benignant scheme ; as if the disposition 


of events by which the whole world of human 
history, from north and south, east and west, directed 
their march to one central point, the establishment 
of Christendom, were not the most stupendous of 
miracles ! It is a yet sadder consideration, that the 
same men who can find God's presence and agency 
only in sensuous miracles, wholly misconceive the 
characteristic purpose and proper objects of historic 
Christianity and of the outward and visible Church, 
of which historic Christianity is the ground and the 
indispensable condition ; but this is a subject delicate 
and dangerous, at all events requiring a less scanty 
space than the margins of these honestly printed 

Jbid. s. 4, p. 133. 

The death of Ananias and Sapphira, and the blindness of 
Elymaa the sorcerer, amount not to this, for they were 
miraculous inflictions. 

One great difficulty respecting, not the historic 
truth (of which there can be no rational doubt), but 
the miraculous nature, of the sudden deaths of 
Ananias and Sapphira is derived from the measure 
which gave occasion to it, namely, the sale of their 
property by the new converts of Palestine, in order to 
establish that community of goods, which, according 
to a Rabbinical tradition, existed before the Deluge, 
and was to be restored by the children of Seth (one 
of the names which the Jewish Christians assumed) 
before the coming of the Son of Man. Now this was 
a very gross and carnal, not to say fanatical, mis- 
understanding of our Lord's words, and had the 
effect of reducing the Churches of the Circumcision 
to beggary, and of making them an unnecessary 
burthen on the new Churches in Greece and else- 
where. See Rhenferd as to this. 


The fact of Ely mas, however, concludes the mira- 
culous nature of the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira, 
which, taken of themselves, would indeed have always 
been supposed, but could scarcely have been proved, 
the result of a miraculous or superhuman power. 
There are for me, I confess, great difficulties in this 
incident, especially when it is compared with our 
Lord's reply to the Apostles' proposal of calling down 
fire from heaven. The Son of Man is not come to 
destroy, &c. At all events it is a subject that 
demands and deserves deep consideration. 

Ibid, s. 1, p. 141. 

The religion of Jesus Christ is the form of sound doctrine 
and wholesome words, which is set down in Scripture indefi- 
nitely, actually conveyed to us by plain places, and separated 
as for the question of necessary or not necessary by the 
Symbol of the Apostles. 

I cannot refrain from again expressing my surprise 
at the frequency and the undoubting positiveness 
of this assertion in so great a scholar, so profound a 
Patrician, as Jeremy Taylor was. He appears bona 
fide to have believed the absurd fable of this Creed 
having been a pic-nic to which each of the twelve 
Apostles contributed his symholum. Had Jeremy 
Taylor taken it for granted so completely and at so 
early an age, that he read vnthout attending to the 
various passages in the Fathers and ecclesiastical 
historians, which show the gradual formation of this 
Creed ? It is certainly possible, and I see no other 
solution of the problem. 

lUd, s. 9, p. 153. 

Judge not, that ye be not judged. The dread of 
these words is, I fear, more influential on my spirit 

234 ;teremy taylor« 

than either the duty of charity or my sense of 
Taylor's high merits, in enabling me to struggle 
against the strong inclination to pass the sentence of 
dishonesty on the reasoning in this paragraph. Had 
I met the passage in Richard Baxter or in Bishop 
Hall, it would have made no such unfavourable 
impression. But Taylor was so acute a logician, and 
had made himself so completely master of the sub- 
ject, that it is hard to conceive him blind to sophistry 
so glaring. I am myself friendly to Infant Baptism, 
but for that reason feel more impatience of any 
unfairness in its defenders. 

Ibid. Ad. 3 and 13, p. 178. 

But then, that God is not as much before hand with 
Christian as with Jewish infants is a thing which can 
never be believed by them who understand that in the 
Gospel God opened all his treasures of mercies, and unsealed 
the fountain itself; whereas, before, he poured forth only 
rivulets of mercy and comfort. 

This is mere sophistry; and I doubt whether 
Taylor himself believed it a suflBcient reply to his 
own argument. There is no doubt that the primary 
purpose of Circumcision was to peculiarise the Jews 
by an indelible visible sign ; and it was as necessary 
that Jewish infants should be known to be Jews as 
Jewish men. Then humanity and mere safety 
determined that the bloody rite should be performed 
in earliest infancy, as soon as the babe might be 
supposed to have gotten over the fever of his birth. 
This is clear ; for women had no correspondent rite, 
but the same result was obtained by the various 
severe laws concerning their marriage with aliens 
and other actions. 


Ibid. p. 180. 

And as those persons who could not be circumcised (I 
mean the females), yet were baptized, as is notorious in the 
Jews' books and story. 

Yes, but by no command of God, but only their 
own fancies. 

Ibid, Ad. 4, p. 181. 

Whosoever shall not receive the hingdom of Ood as a little 
child, shall not enter therein : receive it as a little child 
receives it, that is, with innocence, and without any let or 

Is it not evident that Christ here converted 
negatives into positives? As a babe is without 
malice negatively, so you must be positively and 
by actuation, that is, full of love and meekness ; as 
the babe is unresisting, so must you be docile, and 
so on. 

Ibid, Ad. 5. 

And yet, notwithstanding this terrible paragraph, 
Taylor believed that infants were not a whit the 
worse off for not being baptized. Strange contra- 
diction ! They are born in sin, and Baptism is the 
only way of deliverance ; and yet it is not. For the 
infant is de se of the kingdom of heaven. Christ 
blessed them, not in order to make them so, but 
because they already were so. So that this argu- 
ment seems more than all others demonstrative for 
the Anabaptist, and to prove that Baptism derives 
all its force if it be celestial magic, or all its meaning 
if it be only a sacrament and symbol, from the 
presumption of actual sin in the person baptized. 


Ibid. Ad. 15, p. 186. 

And he that hath without difference commanded that all 
nations should be baptized, hath >vithout difference com- 
manded all sorts of persons. 

Even so our Lord commanded all men to repent, 
did he therefore include babes of a month old?* 
Yes, when they became capable of repentance. And 
even so babes are included in the general command 
of Baptism, that is, as soon as they are baptizable. 
But Baptism supposed both repentance and a 
promise ; babes are not capable of either, and 
therefore not of Baptism. For the physical element 
was surely only the sign and seal of a promise by a 
counter promise and covenant. The rite of circum- 
cision is wholly inapplicable; for there a covenant 
w^as between Abraham and God, not between God 
and the infant. " Do so and so to all your male 
children, and T will favor them. Mark them before 
the world as a peculiar and separate race, and I will 
then consider them as my chosen people." But 
Baptism is personal, and the baptized a subject not 
an object ; not a thing, but a person ; that is, having 
reason, or actually and not merely potentially. 
Besides, Jeremy Taylor was too sound a student of 
Erasmus and Grotius not to know the danger of 
screwing up St. Paul's accommodations of Jewish 

• Lightfoot and Wall use this strong argument for the lawfulness and 
implied duty of Infant Baptism in the Christian Church. It was the 
universal practice of the Jews to baptize the infant children of proselytes 
as well as their parents. Instead, therefore, of Christ's silence as to 
infants by name in his commission to baptize all nations being an 
argument that he meant to exclude them, it is a sign that he meant to 
include them. For it was natural that the precedent custom should 
prevail, unless it were expressly forbidden. The force of this, however, 
is limited to the ceremony ; — its character and efficacy are not established 
by it.— Ed. 


rites, meant doubtless as inducements of rhetoric and 
innocent compliances with innocent and invincible 
prejudices, into articles of faith. The conclusions 
are always true ; but all the arguments are not and 
were never intended to be reducible into syllogisms 

Ihid, Ad. 18, p. 191. 

Bat let us hear the answer. First, it is said, that Baptism 
and the Spirit signify the same thing ; for by water is meant 
the effect of the Spirit. 

By the * effect,* the Anabaptist clearly means the 
causa causanSf the * act of the Spirit.' As well 
might Taylor say that a thought is not thinking, 
because it is the effect of thinking. Had Taylor 
been right, the water to be an apt sign ought to have 
been dirty water ; for that would be the res effecta. 
But it is pure water, therefore res agens. 

Ibid. p. 192. 

For it is certain and evident, that regeneration or new 
birth is here enjoined to all as of absolute and indispensable 

•Yet Taylor himself has denied it over and over 
again in his tracts on Original Sin ; and how is it in 
harmony with the words of Christ — Of such are the 
kingdom of heaven ? Are we not regenerated back 
to a state of spiritual infancy ? Yet for such Anti- 
paedobaptists as hold the dogma of original guilt it is 
doubtless a fair argument ; but Taylor ought not to 
have used it as certain and evident in itself, and not 
merely ad hominem et per accidens. As making a 
bow is in England the understood conventional mark 
or visible language of reverence, so in the East was 


Baptism the understood outward and visible mark of 
conversion and initiation. So much for the visible 
act : then for the particular meaning affixed to it by 
Christ. This was ixerdvoLa, an adoption of a new 
principle of action and consequent reform of conduct; 
a cleansing, but especially a cleansing away of the 
carnal film from the mind's eye. Hence the primi- 
tive Church called baptism (f>(as, light, and the 
Eucharist fo)^, life. Baptism, therefore, was properly 
the sign, the precursor^ or rather the first act, the 
initiumj of that regeneration of which the whole 
spiritual life of a Christian is the complete process ; 
the Eucharist indicating the means, namely, the 
continued assimilation of and to the Divine Humanity. 
Hence the Eucharist was called the continuation of 
the Incarnation. 


And yet it does not follow that they should all be 
baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire. But it is meant 
only that that glorious effect should be to them a sign of 
Christ's eminency above him ; they should see from him a 
Baptism greater than that of John. 

This is exactly of a piece with that gloss of the 
Socinians in evasion of St. Paul's words concerning 
Christ's emptying himself of the form of God, and 
becoming a servant, which all the world of Christiana 
had interpreted of the Incarnation. But no ! it only 
referred to the miracle of his transfiguration ! 

credat Judceus ApeUa t 

Nan ego, 

St. John could not mean this, unless he denied the 
distinct personality of the Holy Ghost. For it was 
the Holy Ghost that then descended as the substitute 


of Christ ; nor does St. Luke even hint that it was 
understood to be a Baptism, even if we suppose the 
tongues of fire to be anything visual, and not as we 
say, Victory sate on his helmet like an eagle. The 
spirit of eloq;uence descended into them like a tongue 
of fire, and that they spoke different languages is, I 
conceive, no where said ; but only that being rustic 
Galileans they yet spake a dialect intelligible to 
all the Jews from the most different provinces. 
For it is clear they were all Jews, and, as Jews, had 
doubtless a lingua communis which all understood 
when spoken, though persons of education only could 
speak it. Even so a German boor understands, but 
yet cannot talk in. High German, that is, the 
language of his Bible and Hymn-book. So it is with 
the Scotch of Aberdeen with regard to pure English, 
In short Taylor's arguments press on the Anabaptists, 
only as far as the Anabaptists baptize at all ; they 
are in fact attacks on Baptism ; and it would only 
follow from them that the Baptist is more rational 
than the Pa^do baptist, but that the Quaker is more 
consistent than either. To pull off your hat is in 
Europe a mark of respect. What, if a parent in his 
last will should command his children and posterity 
to pull off their hats to their superiors, — and in 
course of time these children or descendants emigrated 
to China, or some place, where the same ceremony 
either meant nothing, or an insult. Should we not 
laugh at them if they did not interpret the words 
into. Pay reverence to your superiors. Even so 
Baptism was the Jewish custom, and natural to those 
countries ; but with us it would be a more significant 
rite if applied as penance for excess of zeal and acts 
of bigotry, especially as sprinUing. 


Ibid, p. 196. 

But fiurther yet I demand, can infjBints receive Christ in .the 
Eucharist ? 

Surely the wafer and the tea-spoonful of wine 
might be swallowed by an infant, as well as water be 
sprinkled upon him. But if the former is not the 
Eucharist because without faith and repentance, so 
cannot tbe latter, it would seem, be Baptism. For 
they are declared equal adjuncts of both Sacraments. 
The argument therefore is a mere petitio principii 
sub lite. 

Ibid, Ad. 9, p. 197. 

The promise of the Holy Ghost is made to all, to us and 
to our children : and if the Holy Ghost belongs to them, 
then Baptism belongs to them also. 

If this be not rank enthusiasm I know not what is. 
The Spirit is promised to them, first, as protection 
and providence, and as internal operation when those 
faculties are developed, in and by which the Spirit 
co-operates. Can Taylor shew an instance in Scripture 
in which the Holy Spirit is said to operate simply, 
and without the co-operation of the subject ? 

Ibid. Ad. 19, p. 199. 

And when the boys in the street sang Hosanna to the 
Son of David, our blessed Lord said that if they had held 
their peace, the stones of the street would have cried out 

By the same argument I could defend the sprinkling 
of mules and asses with holy water, as is done yearly 
at Rome on St. Antony's day, I believe. For they 
are capable of health and sickness, of restiveness and 
of good temper, and these are all emanations from 


their Creator. Besides in the great form of Baptism 
the words are not €v droftart, hut €ls to Svofxa, and 
many learned men have shewn that they may mean 
* into the power or influence ' of the Father, the Son, 
and the Spirit. But spiritual influences suppose 
capability in act of receiving them ; and we must 
either pretend to believe that the soul of the babe, 
that is, his consciousness, is acted on without his con-» 
sciousness, or that the instrumental cause is ante- 
cedent by years to its effect, which would be a 
conjunction disjunctive with a vengeance. Again, 
Baptism is nothing except as followed by the Spirit ; 
but it is irrational to say, that the Spirit acts on the 
mere potentialities of an infant. For wherein is the 
Spirit, as used in Scripture in appropriation to 
Christians, different from God's universal providence 
and goodness, but that the latter like the sun may 
shine on the wicked and on the good, on the passive 
and on those who by exercise increase its effect; 
whereas the former always implies a co-operant subject, 
that is, a developed reason. When God gave his 
Spirit miraculously to the young child, Daniel, he at 
the same time miraculously hastened the development 
of his understanding. 

IHd, Ad. 28, p. 205, 

But we see also that although Christ required faith of them 
who came to be healed, yet when any were brought, or came 
in behalf of others, he only required faith of them who came, 
and their faith did benefit to others. * • ♦ ♦ 

But this instance is so certain a reproof of this objection 
of theirs, which is their principal, which is their all, that it is 
a wonder to me they should not all be convinced at the 
reading and observing of it. 

So far from certainty, I And no strength at all 
in this reproof. Doubtless Christ at a believer*a 



request might heal his child's or his serrant s bodily 
fiickness ; for this was an act of power, requiring only 
an object. But is it any where said, that at a 
believer's request he gave the Spirit and the graces 
of faith to an unbeliever without any mental act, or 
moral co-operation of the latter ? This would have 
been a proof indeed ; but Taylor's instance is a mere 
ad aliud. 

Ibid. Ad. 31, p. 207. 

And although there are some effects of the Holy Spirit which 
require natural capacities to be their foundation ; yet those 
are the iytpyflfmra or powers of working : but the x^^^^f^^^^fh 
and the inheritance and the title to the promises require 
nothing on our part, but that we can receive them. 

The Bishop flutters about and about, but never 
fairly answers the question, What does Baptism do ? 
The Baptist says it attests forgiveness of sins, as the 
reward of faith and repentance. This is intelligible ; 
but as to the xaplcyLara — the children of believers, 
if so taught and educated, are surely entitled to the 
promises ; and what analogy is there in this to any 
one act of power and gift of powers mentioned as 
XaptV/xara, when the word is really used in contra- 
distinction from €V€pyriixaTa? Baptism is spoken 
of many times by St. Paul properly as well as 
metaphorically, and in the former sense it is never 
described as a xapta-fjia on a passive recipient, while 
in the latter sense it always respects an ivipyrjiia of 
the Spirit of God, and a (rvvipyrjixa in the spirit of 
the recipient. All that Taylor can make out is, 
that Baptism effects a potentiality in a potentiality^ 
or a chalking of chalk to make white white. 


lUd, p. 210. 

And if it be questioned bj wise men whether the want of 
it do not occasion their eternal loss, and it is not questioned 
whether Baptism does them any hurt or no, then certainly 
to baptize them is the surer way without all peradventure. 

Now this is the strongest argument of all against 
Infant Baptism, and that which alone weighed at one 
time with me, namely, that it supposes and most 
certainly encourages a belief concerning God, the 
most blasphemous and intolerable; and no human 
wit can express this more forcibly and afifectingly 
than Taylor himself has done in his Letter to a Lady 
on Original Sin. It is too plain to be denied that 
the belief of the strict necessity of Infant Baptism, 
and the absolute universality of the practice did not 
commence till the dogma of original guilt had begun 
to despotise in the Church : while that remained 
uncertain and sporadic. Infant Baptism was so too ; 
some did it, many did not. But as soon as Original 
Sin in the sense of actual guilt became the popular 
creed, then all did it.* 

Ibid, s. 16, p. 224. 

And although they have done violence to all philosophy 
and the reason of man, and \mdone and cancelled the 
principles of two or three sciences, to. bring in this article ; 

* The Author's views of Baptism are stated more fully and me- 
thodically in the Aids to Reflection ; but even that statement is imperfect, 
and consequently open to objection, as was frequently admitted by Mr. 
C. himself. The Editor is unable to say what precise spiritual efficacy 
the Author nltimately ascribed to Infant Baptism ; but he was certainly 
an advocate for the practice, and appeared as sponsor at the font for 
more than one of his friends' children. See his Letter, to a Godchild, 
printed, for this purpose, at the end of this volume ; his Sonnet on his 
Baptismal Birthday (Poet. Works, ii.p. 161), In the tenth line of which, 
in many copies, there was a misprint of ' heart ' for ' front ; ' and tha 
Table Talk, 2nd edit. p. 183.— £;i. 


yet they have a divine revelation, whose literal and gram- 
matical sense, if that sense were intended, would warrant 
them to do violence to all the sciences in the circle. And 
indeed that Transubstantiation is openly and violently against 
natural reason is no argument to make them disbelieve it, 
who believe the mystery of the Trinity in all those niceties 
of explication which are in the School (and which now-a-days 
pass for the doctrine of the Church), with as much yiolence 
to the principles of natural and supernatural philosophy as 
can be imagined to be in the point of Transubstantiation. 

This is one of the many passages inTaylor^s works 
which lead me to think that his private opinions were 
favorable to Socinianism. Observe, to ib.e views of 
Socinus, not to modem Unitarianism, as taught by 
Priestley and Belsham. And doubtless Socinianism 
would much more easily bear a doubt, whether the 
difference between it and the orthodoj^ faith was not 
more in words than in the things meant, than the 
Arian hypothesis. A mere conceptualist, at least, 
might plausibly ask whether either party, the Atba- 
nasian or the Socinian, had a sufficiently distinct 
conception of what the one meant by the hypostatical 
union of the Divine Logos with the man Jesus; 
or the other of his plenary, total, perpetual, and 
continuous inspiration, to have any well-grounded 
assurance, that they do not mean the same thing. 

Moreover, no one knew better than Jeremy Taylor 
that this apparent soar of the hooded falcon, faith; 
to the very empyrean of bibliolatry amounted in fact 
to a truism of which the following syllogism is a fair 
illustration. All stones are men: all men think: 
ergOf all stones think. The major is taken for 
granted, the minor no one denies; and then th^j 
conclusion is good logic, though a very foolish untruth. 
Or, if an oval were demonstrated by Euclid to be a 
circle, it would be a circle ; and if it were a demoiv 


strable circle, it would be a circle, though the straight 
lines drawable from the centre to the circumference 
are unequal. If we were quite certain that an 
omniscient Being, incapable of deceiving, or being 
deceived, had assured us that 5x5 = 6x3, and that 
the two sides of a certain triangle were together less 
than the third, then we should be warranted in 
setting at nought the science of arithmetic and 
geometry. On another occasion, as when it was 
the good Bishop's object to expose the impudent 
assertions of the Romish Church since the eleventh 
century, he would have been the first to have replied 
by a counter syllogism. 

If we are quite certain that any writing pretending 
to divine origin contains gross contradictions to de* 
monstrable truths in eodem genere, or commands that 
outrage the clearest principles of right and wrong ; 
then we may be equally certain that the pretence is 
a blasphemous falsehood, inasmuch as the compati- 
bility of a document with the conclusions of self- 
evident reason, and with the laws of conscience, is a 
condition a priori of any evidence adequate to the 
proof of its having been revealed by God. 

This principle is clearly laid down both by Moses 
and by St. Paul. If a man pretended to be a prophet, 
he was to predict some definite event that should 
take place at some definite time, at no unreasonable 
distance : and if it were not fulfilled, he was to be 
punished as an impostor. But if he accompanied 
his prophecy with any doctrine subversive of the 
exclusive Deity and adorability of the one God of 
heaven and earth, or any seduction to a breach of 
God's commandments, he was to be put to death at 
once, all other proof of his guilt and imposture being 
superfluous.* So St. Paul. If any man preach 

♦ Deut. xlU. 1—6. xvUl. 22— Ed. 


another Gospel, though he should work all miracles, 
though he had the appearance and evinced the 
superhuman powers of an angel from heaven — he 
was at once, in contempt of all imaginable sensuous 
miracles, to be holden accursed.* 

Ihid, s. 18, p. 225, 

And now for any danger to men's persons for suffering 
such a doctrine, this I shall say, that if they who do it are 
not formally guilty of idolatry, there is no danger that they 
whom they persuade to it, should be guilty. ♦ ♦ • Wh^n 
they believe it to be no idolatry, then their so believing it is 
sufficient security from that crime, which hath so great a 
tincture and residency in the will, that from thence only it 
hath its being criminal. 

Will not this argument justify all Idolaters ? For 
surely they believe themselves worshippers either of 
the Supreme Being under a permitted form, or of 
some son of God (as Apollo) to whom he has dele- 
gated such and such powers. If this be the case, 
there is no such crime as idolatry : yet the second 
commandment expressly makes the worshipping of 
God in or before a visual image of him not only 
idolatry, but the most hateful species of it. Now do 
they not worship God in the visible form of bread, 
and prostrate themselves before pictures of the 
Trinity? Are we so mad as to suppose that the 
pious heathens thought the statue of Jupiter, Jove 
himself ? No ; and yet these heathens were idolaters. 
But there was no such being as Jupiter. No ! Was 
there no King of Kings and Lord of Lords ; and 
does the name Jove instead of Jehovah (perhaps the 
same word too) make the difference ? Were Marcus 
Antoninus and Epictetus idolaters ? 

• G«ato<. i. 8, 9.— JEa. 



1. The first great divines among the Reformers, 
Luther, Calvin, and their compeers and successors, 
had thrown the darkness of storms on an awful fact of 
human nature, which in itself had only the darkness 
of negations. What was certain, but incomprehen- 
sible, they rendered contradictory and absurd by a 
vain attempt at explication. It was a fundamental 
fact, and of course could not be comprehended ; for 
to comprehend, and thence to explain, is the same a^ 
to perceive, and thence to point out, a something 
before the given fact, and standing to it in the 
relation of cause to effect. Thus they perverted 
original sin into hereditary guilt, and made God act 
in the spirit of the cruellest laws of jealous govern- 
ments towards their enemies, upon the principle of 
treason in the blood. This was brought in to explain 
their own explanation of God's ways, and then too 
often God's alleged way in this case was adduced to 
justify the cruel state law of treason in the blood. 

2. In process of time, good men and of active 
minds were shocked at this ; but, instead of passing 
back to the incomprehensible fact, with a vault over 
the unhappy idol forged for its comprehension, they 
identified the two in name ; and while in truth their 
arguments applied only to a false theory, they 
rejected the fact for the sake of the mis-solution, and 
fell into far worse errors. For the mistaken theorist 
had built upon a foundation, though but a super- 
structure of chaff and straw ; but the opponents built 
on nothing. Aghast at the superstructure, these latter 
Ysn away from that which is the sole foundation of all 
human religion. 


3. Then came the persecutions of the Arminians in 
Holland ; then the struggle in England against the 
Arminian Laud and all his party — terrible persecutors 
in their turn of the Calvinists and systematic 
divines ; then the Civil War and the persecutions of 
the Church by the Puritans in their turn ; and just 
in this state of heated feelings did Taylor write these 
Works, which contain dogmas subversive of true 
Christian faith, namely, his Unum Necessariunit or 
Doctrine and Practice of Repentance, which reduces 
the cross of Christ to nothing, especially in the 
Seventh chapter of the same, and the after defences 
of it in his Letters on Original Sin to a Lady, and 
to the Bishop of Bochester; and the Liberty of 
Prophesying, which, putting toleration on a false 
ground, has left no ground at all for right or wrong 
in matters of Christian faith. 

In the marginal notes, which I have written in these 
several treatises on Repentance^ I appear to myself to 
have demonstrated that Taylor's system has no one 
advantage over the Lutheran in respect of God*s 
attributes ; that it is bond fide Pelagianism (though 
he denies it; for let him define that grace which 
Pelagius would not accept, because incompatible 
with free will and merit, and profess his belief in it 
thus defined, and every one of his arguments against 
absolute decrees tell against himself); and lastly, 
that its inevitable logical consequenc/es are Socinianism 
and qua sequuntur. In Tillotson the face of Armi- 
nianism looked out fuller, and Christianity is repre- 
sented as a mere arbitrary contrivance of God, yet 
one without reason. Let not the surpassing eloquence 
of Taylor dazzle you, nor his scholastic retiary versa- 
tility of logic illaqueate your good sense. Above all 
do not dwell too much on the apparent absurdity or 
horror of the dogma he opposes, but examine what 


he puts in its place, and receive candidly the few 
hints which I have admarginated for jour assistance, 
being in the love of truth and of Christ, 

Your Brother. 

I have omitted one remark, probably from over 
fulness of intention to have inserted it. 1. The good 
man and eloquent expresses his conjectural belief diat, 
if Adam had not fallen, Christ would still have been 
necessary, though not, perhaps, by Incarnation. Now, 
in the first place, this is only a play thought of him- 
self, and Scotus, and perhaps two or three others in 
the Schools ; no article of faith or of general pre* 
sumption; consequently it has little serious effect 
even on the guessers themselves. In the next place, 
if it were granted, yet it would be a necessity wholly 
ex parte Dei^ not at all ex parte Hominis : — ^for what 
does it amount to but this — that God having destined 
a creature for two states, the earthly rational, and the 
heavenly spiritual, and having chosen to give him, in 
the first instance, faculties sufficient only for the first 
state, must afterwards superinduce those sufficient for 
the second state, or else God would at one and the 
same time destine and not destine. This therefore is 
a mere fancy, a theory, but not a binding religion ; no 
covenant. 2. But the Incarnation, even after the 
fall of Adam, he clearly makes to be specifically of no 
necessity. It was only not to take away peevishly 
the estate of grace from the poor innocent children, 
because of the father, — according to the good Bishop, a 
poor ignorant, who before he ate the apple of knowledge 
did not know what right and wrong was ; and Christ's 
Incarnation would have been no more necessary then 
than it was before, according to Taylor's belief. Here 
again the Incarnation is wholly a contrivance ex parte 
Dei, and no way resulting from any default of man. 


3. Consequently Taylor neither saw nor admitted 
any a 'priori necessity of the Incarnation from the 
nature of man, and which, being felt by man in his 
ONvn nature, is itself the greatest of proofs for the 
admission of it, and the strongest pre-disposing cause 
of the admission of all proof positive. Not having 
this, he was to seek ah extra for proofs in facts, in 
historical evidence in the world of sense. The same 
causes produce the same effects. Hence Grotius, 
Taylor, and Baxter (then, as appears in his Life, in a 
state of uneasy doubt), were the first three writers of 
evidences of the Christian religion, such as have been 
since followed up by hundreds, — nine-tenths of them 
Socinians or Semi-Socinians, and which, taking head 
and tail, I call the Grotio-Paleyan way. 

4. Hence the good man was ever craving for some 
morsel out of the almsbasket of all external events, 
in order to prove to himself his own immortality ; 
and, with grief and shame I tell it, became evidence 
and authority in Irish stories of ghosts, and appari- 
tions, and witches. Let those who are astonished 
refer to Glanville on Witches, and they will be more 
astonished still. The fact now stated at once explains 
and justifies my anxiety in detecting the errors of this 
great and excellent genius at their fountain head, — 
the question of Original Sin : for how important must 
that error be which ended in bringing Bishop Jeremy 
Taylor forward as an examiner, judge, and witness in 
an Irish apparition case ! 

76mZ. s. 38, p. 278. 

Although God exacts not an impossible law under eternal 
and insufferable pains, yet he imposes great holiness i^ 
unlimited and indefinite measures, with a design to give 
excellent proportions of reward answerable to the greatness 
of our endeavour. Hell is not the end of them that fail in 


the greatest measures of perfection; but great degrees of 
heaven shall be their portion who do all that they can 
always, and offend in the fewest instances. 

It is not to be denied that one if not more of the 
pambles appears to sanction this, but the same para- 
bles would by consequence seem to favour a state of 
Purgatory. From John, Paul, and the philosophy of 
the doctrine, I should gather a different faith, and 
find a sanction for this too in one of the parables^ 
namely, that of the labourer at the eleventh hour. 
Heaven, bliss, union with God through Christ, do not 
seem to me comparative terms, or conceptions suscep- 
tible of degree. But it is a difficult question. The 
first Fathers of the Reformation, and the early Fathers 
of the primitive Church, present different systems^ 
and in a very different spirit. 

Ibid, pp. 324—828. 
Descriptions of repentance taken from the Holy Scriptures. 

This is a beautiful collection of texts. Still the 
pious but unconverted Jew (a Moses Mendelssohn for 
instance) has a right to ask. What then did Christ 
teach or do, such and of such additional moment as 
to be rightfully entitled the founder of a new law, 
instead of being, like Isaiah and others, an enforcer 
and explainer of the old ? If Christianity, or the 
opus operans of Redemption, wa9 synchronous with 
the Fall of man, then the same answer must be 
returned to the passages here given from the Old 
Testament as to those from the New ; namely, that 
Sanctification is the result of Redemption, not its 
efficient cause or previous condition. Assuredly jmera- 
vorja-is and Sanctification differ only as the plant and 
the growth or growing of the plant But ihe words 


of the Apostle (it will be said) are exhortative and 
dehortative. Doubtless ! and so would be the words 
of a wise physician addressed to a convalescent. 
Would this prove that the patient's revalescence had 
been independent of the medicines given him ? The 
texts are addressed to the free will, and therefore con- 
cerning possible objects of free will. No doubt! 
Should that process, the end and virtue of which is 
to free the will, destroy the free will ? But I cannot 
make it out to my understanding, how the two are 
compatible. — Answer : the spirit knows the things of 
the spirit. Here lies the sole true ground of Lati- 
tudinarianism, Arminian, or Socinian ; and this is the 
sole and sufficient confutation; spiritiialia spiritus 
cognosdt. Would you understand with your ears 
instead of hearing with your understanding? Naw, 
as the ears to the understanding, so is the under- 
standing to the spirit. This Pkto knew; and art 
thou a master in Israel, and knowest it not ? 

lUd. p. 330. 

Who hcUh trodden itnder foot the Son of Ood, and heOh 
counted the blood of the covenant, wherevfith he was sanctified, 
an unholy thing, and ha^ done despite vnto the Spirit of 

By this passage we must interpret the words " sin 
wilfully," in reference to an unpardonable sin, in the 
preceding sentence* 

Ibid, B. 2, p. 432. 
Of the moral capacity of sinful habits. 

Probably from the holiness of his own life, Taylor 
has but just fluttered about a bad habit, not fully 
described it. He has omitted, or rather described 


contradictorily, the case of those with whom the objec- 
tioQS to sin are all strengthened, the dismal conse* 
quences more glaring and always present to them as 
an avenging fury, the sin loathed, detested, hated ; 
and yet, spite of all this, nay, the more for all this, 
perpetrated. Both lust and intemperance would 
furnish too many instances of these most miserable 

Ibid 8. 39, p. 456. 

For every vicious habit being radicated in the will, and 
being a strong love, inclination and adhesion to sin, unless 
the natural being of this love be taken off, the enmity 
against God remains. 

But the most important question is as to those 
vicious habits in which there is no love to sin, but 
only a dread and recoiling from intolerable pain, as in 
the case of the miserable drunkard ! I trust that 
these epileptic agonies are rather the punishments 
than the augmenters of his guilt. The annihilation 
of the wicked is a fearful thought, yet it would solve 
many difficulties both in natural religion and in Scrip<« 
ture. And Taylor in his Arminian dread of Calvinism 
is always too shy of this "grace of God :" he never 
denies, yet never admits, it any separate operancy 
per 86, And this, I fancy, is the true distinction 
of Arminianism and Calvinism in their moral 
effects. Arminianism is cruel to individuals, for fear 
of damaging the race by false hopes and improper 
confidences ; while Calvinism is horrible for the race, 
but full of consolation to the suffering individual. 

The next section is, taken together, one of the many 
instances that confirm my opinion that Cal^ism 
(Archbishop Leighton's for example) compared with 
Taylor's Arminianism, is as the lamb in the wolf s 


skin to the wolf in the lamb's skin ; the one is cruel 
in the phrases, the other in the doctrine. 

lUd, 8. 56, p. 469. 

But if a single act of contrition cannot propure pardon of 
sins that are habitual, then a wicked man that returns not 
till it be too late to root out vicious habits, must despair of 
salvation* I answer, &C 

Would not Taylor's purposes have been sufficiently 
attained by pressing the contrast between attrition 
and contrition with fiEuth, and the utter improbability 
that the latter (which alone can be efficient), shall be 
vouchsafed to a sinner who has continued in his sins 
in the flattery of a death-bed repentance ; a blasphemy 
that seems too near that against the Holy Ghost ? 
My objection to Taylor is, that he seems to reduce the 
death of Christ almost to a cypher; a contrivance, 
rather to reconcile the attributes of God, than an act 
of infinite love to save sinners. But the truth is, 
that this is the peccant part of Arminianism, and 
Tillotson is yet more open than Taylor. Forbid me, 
common goodness, that I should think Tillotson con- 
scious of Socinianism ! but that his tenets involved 
it, I more than suspect. See his Discourses on Tran- 
^ubstantiation, and those near it in the same volume. 

Ibid, s. 64, p. 478. 

Now there is no peradventure, but new-converted persons, 
heathens newly giving up their names to Christ and being 
baptized, if they die in an hour, and were baptized lialf an 
hour after they believe in Christ, are heirs of salvation. 

This granted, I should little doubt of confuting 
all the foregoing, as far as I object to it. I would 
rather be durus pater infantum, like Austin, than 


durus pater (Bgrotantium, Taylor considers all Christ- 
ians who are so called. 

lUd, 8. QQy p. 481. 

All this paragraph is as just as it is fine and lively, 
but far from confirming Taylor's doctrine. The case 
is as between one individual and a general rule. I 
know God's mercy and Christ's merits ; but whether 
your heart has true faith in them, I cannot know. Be 
it unto thee according to thy faith, said Christ : so 
should his ministers say. All these passages, how- 
ever, are utterly irreconcilable with the Eoman 
doctrine, that the priest's absolution is operant, and 
not simply declarative. As to the decisions of Paul- 
inus and Asterius, it is to be feared that they had the 
mortmain bequests and compensations in view more 
than the words of St. Paul, or the manifest purposes 
of redemption by faith. Yea, Taylor himself has his 
redime peccata eleemosynis. 

By the by, I know of few subjects that have been 
more handled and less rationally treated than this 
of alms-giving. Everything a rich man purchases 
beyond absolute necessaries, ought to be purchased in 
the spirit of alms, that is, as the most truly beneficial 
way of dispersing that wealth of which he is the 
steward, not owner. 


St. Paul taught us this secret, that sins are properly made 
habitual upon the stock of impunity. Svn tahmg occasion by 
the law wrought in me all conctipiscence ; &<f>opfi^v Kafiovo'a, 
* apprehending impunity,' 8icb rris ivroXris, • by occasion of 
the commieuidmenV that is, so expressed aiid established as 
it was ; because in the commandment forbidding to lust or 
oovet, inhere was no penalty annexed or threatened in. ths^ 


aanction or in the explication. Murder was death, and do 
was adultery and rebellion. Theft was punished severely 
too ; and so other things in their proportion ; but the desires 
Gbd left under a bare restraint, and affixed no penalty in the 
law. Now sin, that is, men that had a mind to sin, taking 
occasion hence, &c, 

This is a very ingeniaus and very plausible exposi- 
tion of St. Paul's words ; but surely, surely, it ia not 
the right one, I find both the meaning and the 
truth of the Apostle's words in the vividness and con« 
sequently attractive and ad-(or in-)sorbent power given 
to an image or thought by the sense of its danger, by 
the consciousness of its being forbidden, — which, in 
an unregenerate and unassisted will, struggling with, 
or even exciting, the ever-ready inclination of cor- 
rupted nature, produces a perplexity and confusion 
which again increase the person's susceptibility of the 
soliciting image or fancy so intensified. Guilt and 
despair add a stimulus and sting to lust. See lagq 
in Shakspeare. 

IMd. s. 11, p. 500. 

It was not well with thee when thou didst first enter into 
the suburbs of hell by single actions of sin, && 

Ay ! this is excellent indeed, and worthy of a 
guardian angel of the Church. When Jeremy Taylor 
escapes from the Mononomian Romaism, which netted 
him in his too eager recoil from the Antinomian 
boar, brought forth and foddered (as he imagined) in 
Calvin's stye; when from this wiry net he escapes 
into the devotional and the dietetic, as into a green 
meadow-land, with springs, and rivulets, and shel- 
tering groves, where he leads his flock like a 
shepherd; — then it ia that he is most himself,—' 
''--tlien only he is all himselfi the whole Jerem; 


Taylor ; or if there be one other subject graced by 
the same total heautophany, it is in the pouring 
forth of his profound common sense on the ways and 
weaknesses of men and conflicting sects, as for 
instance in the admirable birth, parentage, growth, 
and consummation of a religious controversy in his 
Dissuasive from Popery. 

Ibid. B. 13, p. 502. 

Let every old man that repents of the sins of his evil life 
be very diligent in the search of the particulars ; that by 
drawing them into a heap, and spreading them before his 
eyes, he may be mightily ashamed at their number and 

I dare not condemn, but I am doubtful of this as 
a universal rule. If there be a true hatred of sin, the 
precious time and the spiritual nisus will, I think, be 
more profitably employed in enkindling meditation 
on holiness, and thirstings after the mind of Christ. 

IMd, ss. 31—35, pp. 517, 618. 

Scarce a word in all this but for form's sake con- 
cerning the merits and sacrifice of the Incarnate 
God! Surely Luther would not have given this 
advice to a dying penitent, but have directed* him 
rather to employ his little time in agony of prayer to 
Christ, or in earnest meditations on the astounding 
mystery of his death. In Taylor man is to do every 

Vol. IX. 8. 11, p. 6. 

For Gk>d was so exasperated with mankind, that being 
angry he would still continue that punishment even to the 

VOL.L 8 


leaser sins and sinners, which he only had first threatened to 
Adam ; and so Adam brought it upon them. 

And such a phrase as this used by a man in a 
refutation of Original Sin, on the ground of its 
incompatibility with God's attributes ! " Exasperated " 
with those whom Taylor declares to have been 
innocent and most unfortunate, the two things that 
most conciliate love and pity ! 

Ibid. p. 6. 

If the sequel of the paragraph, comparing God to 
David in one of his worst actions, be not blasphemy, 
the reason is that the good man meant it not as such. 
In facto est, sed non in ayeiite. 

Ibid, 88. 16, 17, pp. 8, 9. 

For the further explication of which it is observable that 
the word * sinner * and * sin ' in Scripture is used for any 
person, that hath a fault or a legal impurity, a debt, a 
vitiosity, defect, or imposition, &c. 

These facts, instead of explaining away Original 
Sin, are unintelligible, nay, absurd and immoral, 
except as shadows, types, and symbols of it, and of 
the Redemption from it. Observe, too, that Taylor 
never dares explain what he means by " Adam was 
mortal of himself and we are mortal from him ; " he 
did not dare affirm that soul and body are alike 
material and perishable, even as the lute and the 
potentiality of music in the lute. And yet if he 
believed the contrary, then, in his construction of the 
doctrine of Original Sin, what has Christ done? 
St. John died in the same sense as Abel died : and 
in the sense of the Church of England neither died 
but only slept in the Lord. 


This same system forced Taylor into the same 
error which Warburton afterwards dressed up with 
such trappings and trammels of erudition, in direct 
contempt of the plain mecming of the Church's 
article ; and he takes it for granted, in many places, 
that the Jews under Moses knew only of temporal 
life and the death of the body. Lastly, he greatly 
degrades the mind of man by causelessly representing 
death as an evil in itself, which, if it be considered 
as a crisis, or phenomenal change, incident to a 
progressive being, ought as little to be thought so, 
as the casting of the caterpillar^s skin to make room 
for the wings of the buttei^y. It is the unveiling of 
the Psyche. I do not affirm this as an article of 
Christian faith; but I say that no candid writer 
ought to hide himself in double meanings. Either 
he should have used the term * death ' [ex Adamo) as 
loss of body, or as change of mode of being and of 
its circumstances; and again this latter as either 
evil for all, or as evil or good according to the moral 
habits of each individual. 

Observe, however, once for all that I do not 
pretend to account for Original Sin. I declare it to 
be an unaccountable fact How can we explain a 
9pecies, when we are wholly in the dark as to the 
genus? Now guilt itself, as well as all other imme- 
diate facts of free will, is absolutely inexplicable ; of 
course original guilt. If we will perversely confound 
the intelligible with the sensible world, misapply the 
logic appropriate to phcmomena and the categories, 
or forms, which are empty except as substantivised 
in facts of experience, in order to use them as the 
Procrustes' bed of faith respecting noumena: if in 
short, we will strive to understand that of which we 
can only know on karX, we may and must make as . 

wild work with reason, will, conscience, guilt, and 



virtue, as with Original Sin and Redemption. On 
every subject first ask, Is it among the alcrdrjra, or 
the vovfi€va? 

Ibid. 8. 23, p. 12, 

It could not make us heirs of danmation. This I shall the 
less need to insist upon, because, of itself it seems so horrid 
to impute to the goodness and justice of Qod to be author of 
so great calamity to innocents, &c* 

Never was there a more hazardous way of rea- 
soning, or rather of placing hum£m ignorance in the 
judgment seat over God*s wisdom. The whole might 
be closely parodied in support of Atheism : rather, 
this is but a paraphrase of the old atheistic argu- 
ments. Either God could not, or would not, prevent 
the moral and physical evils of the universe, including 
the everlasting anguish of myriads of millions: 
therefore he is either not all-powerful or not all-good : 
but a being deficient in power or goodness is not 
God : — ErgOf dc. 

Ibid. B. 25, p. 13. 

I deny not but all persons naturally are so, that they cannot 
arrive at heaven; but unless some other principle be pu^ 
into them, or some great grace done for them, must for ever 
stand separate from seeing the face of God. 

But this is but accidentally occasioned by the sin 
of Adam. Just so might I say, that without the 
great grace of air done for them no living beings 
could live. If it mean more, pray where was the 
grace in creating a being, who without an especial 
grace must pass into utter misery ? If Taylor reply; 
but the grace was added in Christ : why so say the 
Calvinists. According to Taylor there is no fall of 
man ; but only an act and punishment of a man, 


'which punishment consisted in his living in the 
kitchen garden, instead of the flower garden and 
orchard : and Cain was as likely to have murdered 
Abel before, as after, the eating of the forbidden fruit. 
But the very name of the fruit confutes Taylor. 
Adam altered his nature by it. Cain did not. What 
Adam did, I doubt not, we all do. Time is not with 
things of spirit. 

Ibid, 8. 27, p. 14. 

Is hell so easy a pain, or are the souls of children of so 
cheap, BO contemptible a price, that Gk>d should so easily 
throw them into hell 1 

This is an argument against the sine qua non of 
Baptism, not against Original Sin. 


Ibid, B. 67, p. 49. 

Origen said enough to be mistaken in the question. *H &pd 
rod *AihfM KOiu^ TJantov etrrl. Kal rh Karh rris ywauchSf ovk Itrrt 
Kaff ^s ov K^erai. * Adam's curse is common to all. And 
there is not a woman on earth, to whom may not be said 
those things which were spoken to this woman.* 

Origen*8 words ought to have prevented all mistake, 
for he plainly enough overthrows the phantom of 
hereditary guilt ; and as to guilt from a corruption 
of nature, it is just such guilt as the carnivorous 
appetites of a weaned lion, or the instinct of a brood 
of ducklings to run to water. What then is it ? It 
is an evil, and therefore seated in the will ; common 
to all men, the beginning of which no man can 
determine in himself or in others. How comes 
this ? It is a mystery, as the will itself. Deeds 
are in time and space, therefore have a beginning. 
Pure action, that is, the will, is a noumenon^ and 


irreferable to time. Thus Origen calls it neither 
hereditary nor original, but universal sin. The curse 
of Adam is common to all men, because what Adam 
did, we all do : and thus of Eve. You may substitute 
any woman in her place, and the same words apply. 
This is the true solution of this unfortunate question. 
The Trpcoror yjrcvbos is in the dividing the will from 
the acts of the will. The will is ego-agens. 

Ibid. 8. 82, p. 52. 

This paragraph, though very characteristic of the 
Author, is fitter for a comedy than for a grave dis- 
course. It puts one in mind of the play — " More 
sacks in the mill ! Heap, boys, heap ! " 

Ibid. 8. 84, p. 56. 

Praposterum est (said Paulus the lawyer) ante rtos locwpletes 
did quam o/cquisivenrmia. We cannot be said to lose what 
we never had ; and our fathers' goods were not to descend 
upon us, unless they were his at his death. 

Take away from me the knowledge that he was my 
father, dear Bishop, and this will be true. But as it 
stands, the whole is, " says Paulus the Lawyer ;" and, 
" Well said, Lawyer ! " say I. 

Ibid. p. 57. 

Which though it was natural, yet from Adam it began to 
be a curse ; just as the motion of a serpent upon his belly, 
which was concreated with him, yet upon this story was 
changed into a malediction and an evil adjunct. 

How ? I should really like to understand this. 
Ibid. c. viL p. 73, in initio. 

In this most eloquent treatise we may detect sundry 


logical lapses, sometimes in the statement, sometimes 
in the instances, and once or twice in the conclusions. 
But the main and pervading error lies in the treat- 
ment of the subject in genere by the forms and rules 
of conceptual logic ; which deriving all its material 
from the senses, and borrowing its forms from the J 
sense {ala-Orja-Ls Kadapa) or intuitive faculty, is neces^ 
sarily inapplicable to spiritual mysteries, the very 
definition or contra-distinguishing character of which 
is that they transcend the sense, and therefore the 
understanding, the faculty, as Archbishop Leighton ' 
and Immanuel Kant excellently define it, which judges 
according to sense. In the Aids to Reflection,* I^ 
have shown that the proper function of the under- ^ 
standing or mediate faculty is to collect individual or 
sensible concretes into kinds and sorts (genera et 
species) by means of their common characters (nota 
communes) ; and to fix and distinguish these con- ^ 
ceptions (that is, generalised perceptions) by words. 
Words are the only immediate objects of the under- ^ 
standing. Spiritual verities, or truths of reason 
respective ad realia, and herein distinguished from the 
merely formal, or so-called universal truths, are differ- 
enced from the conceptions of the understanding by 
the immediatcy of the knowledge, and from the imme- 
diate truths of sense, — ^that is, from both pure and 
mixed intuitions, — by not being sensible; that is, not , 
representable by figure, measurement, or weight ; nor ( 
connected with any affection of our sensibility, such | 
as color, taste, odors, and the like. And such know- I 
ledges we, when we speak correctly, name ideas. ^ 

Now Original Sin, that is, sin that has its origin in 
itself, or in the will of the sinner, but yet in a state 
or condition of the will not peculiar to tide individual 
agent, but common to the human race, is an idea ; 

• Pp. 206-227. Ed. 


and one diagnostic or contra-distinguisbing mark 
appertaining to all ideas, is, that they are not 
adequately expressible by words. An idea can only 
be expressed (more correctly suggested) by two con- 
tradictory positions; as for example; the soul is 
all in every part ; — ^nature is a sphere, the centre of 
which is everywhere, and its circumference nowhere, 
and the like. 

Hence many of Bishop Taylor's objections, grounded 
on his expositions of the doctrine, prove nothing more 
than that the doctrine concerns an idea. But besides 
this, Taylor everywhere assumes the consequences of 
Original Sin as superinduced on a pre-existing nature, 
in no essential respect differing from our present 
nature ; — ^for instance, on a material body, with its 
inherent appetites and its passivity to material agents; 
— in short, on an animal nature in man. But this 
very nature, as the antagonist of the spirit or super- 
natural principle in man, is in fact the Original Sin, 
— ^the product of the will indivisible from the act 
producing it ; just as in pure geometry the mental 
construction is indivisible from the constructive act of 
the intuitive faculty. Original Sin, as the product, is 
a fact concerning which we know by the light of the 
idea itself, that it must originate in a self-determina- 
tion of a will. That which we do not know is how it 
originates, and this we cannot explain; first, from 
the necessity of the subject, namely, the will ; and 
secondly because it is an idea, and all ideas are 
inconceivable. It is an idea, because it is not a 

Ibid, B. 2, p. 74, 75. 

And they are injurious to Christ, who think that from 
Adam we might have inherited immortality. Christ was the 
giver and preacher of it ; h^ Jmmght life cmd immortality to 


light through the gospel. It is a singular benefit given by Gk>d 
to mankind through Jesus Christ. 

And none inherit it but those \vho are horn of 
Christ : ergo, bad men and infidels are not immortal. 
Immortality is one thing, a happy immortality another. 
St. Paul meant the latter : Taylor either the former, 
or his words have no meaning at all ; for no man ever 
thought or dreamed that we inherited heaven from 
Adam, but that as sons of Adam, that is, as men, we 
have souls that do not perish with the body. I often 
suspect that Taylor, in abditis Jidei ^o-coreptK^y, in- 
clined to the belief that there is no other immortality 
but heaven, and that hell is a pcena damni negativa^ 
haud privativa. I own myself strongly inclined to 
it ; — ^but so many texts against it ! I am confident 
that the doctrine would be a far stronger motive than 
the present ; for no man will believe eternal misery 
of himself, but millions would admit, that if they did 
not amend their lives they would he undeserving of 
living for ever. 

Ibid, s. 6, p. 77. 

7Ka /i^ x\7)fJLft.{)pa rhv iv rifjuv KarairovTiirii \oyiirfi6v cis rbv 
r^s ofjuxprlas fivdSy, 

" Lest the tumultuous crowd throw the reason 
within us over bridge into the gulf of sin." What a 
vivid figure ! It is enough to make any man set to 
work to read Chrysostom. 

^ccantes mente »iib tma. 

Note Prudentius's use of mente sub una for * in one 


Ibid, p. 78. 

For even now we see, by a sad experience, that the afflicted 
and the miserable are not only apt to anger and envy, but 
have many more desires and more weaknesses, and con- 
sequently more aptnesses to sin in many instances than those 
who are less troubled. And this is that which was said by 
Arnobius ; proni ad culpa8,et ad libidinis varios appetitosviHo 
8u>mu8 infirmitatis ingtnUa. 

No. Arnobius never said so good and wise a thing 
in his lifetime. His quoted words have no such pro- 
found meaning. 

Ihid. s. 7, p. 78. 

That which remained was a reasonable soul, fitted for the 
actions of life and reason, but not of anything that was 

What Taylor calls reason I call understanding, and 
give the name reason to that which Taylor would have 
called spirit. 

Ihid. 8. 12, p. 84. 

And all that evil which is upon us^ being not by any 
positive infliction, but by privative, or the taking away gifts, 
and blessings, and graces from us, which God, not having 
promised to give, was neither naturally, nor by covenant, 
obliged to give, — ^it is certain he could not be obliged to 
continue that to the sons of a sinning father, which to an 
innocent father he was not obliged to give. 

Oh ! certainly not, if hell were not attached to acts 
and omissions, which without these very graces it is 
morally impossible for men to avoid. Why will not 
Taylor speak out ? 


Ibid. s. 14, p. 86. 

The doctrine of the ancient Fathers was that free will 
remain edin us after the Fall. 

Yea ! as the locomotive faculty in a man in a strait 
waistcoat. Neither St. Augustine nor Calvin denied 
the remanence of the will in the fallen spirit; but 
they, and Luther as well as they, objected to the flat- 
tering epithet *free' will. In the only Scriptural 
sense, as concerning the unregenerate, it is implied 
in the word will, and in this sense, therefore, it is 
superfluous and tautologic ; and, in any other sense, 
it is the fruit and final end of Redemption, — the 
glorious liberty of the Gospel. 

Ibid. s. 16, p. 92. 

For my part I believe this only as certain, that nature 
alone cannot bring them to heaven, and that Adam left us 
in a state in which we could not hope for it. 

This is likewise my belief, and that man must 
have had a Christ, even if Adam had continued in 
Paradise — if indeed the history of Adam be not a 
mythos; as, but for passages in St. Paul, we should 
most of us believe ; the serpent speaking, the names 
of the trees, and so on ; and the whole account of the 
creation in the first chapter of Genesis seems to me 
clearly to say : — " The literal fact you could not 
comprehend if it were related to you; but you 
may conceive of it as if it had taken place thus 
and thus." 

Ibid. s. 50, p. 166. 

That in some things our nature is cross to the divine com- 
mandment, is not always imputable to us, because our natures 
were before the commandment. 

This is what I most complain of in Jeremy 


Taylor^s ethics; namely, that he constantly refers 
us to the deeds or phenomena in time, the effluents 
from the source, or like the species of Epicurus; 
while the corrupt nature is declared guiltless and 
irresponsible ; and this too on the pretext that it was 
prior in time to the commandment, and therefore not 
against it. But time is no more predicable of eternal 
reason than of will ; but not of will ; for if a will be 
at all, it must be ens spiritucde; and this is the first 
negative definition of spiritual — ^whatever having true 
being is not contemplable in the forms of time and 
space. Now the necessary consequence of Taylor's 
scheme is a conscience-worrying, casuistical, monkish 
work-holiness. Deeply do I feel the difficulty and 
danger that besets the opposite scheme ; and never 
would I preach it, except under such provisos as 
would render it perfectly compatible with the positions 
previously established by Taylor in this chapter, 
s. xliv. p. 158. 'Lastly; the regenerate not only 
hath received the Spirit of God, but is wholly led by 
him,' &c. 


If this Treatise of Repentance contain Bishop 
Taylor's habitual and final convictions, I am persuaded 
that in some form or other he believed in a Purgatory. 
In fact, dreams and apparitions may have been the 
pretexts, and the immense addition of power and 
wealth which the belief entailed on the priesthood, 
may have been their motives for patronising it ; but 
the efficient cause of its reception by the churches is 
to be found in the preceding Judaic legality and 
monk-moral of the Church, according to which the 
fewer only could hope for the peace of heaven as their 
next immediate state. The holiness that sufficed for 


this would evince itself (it was believed) by the power 
of working miracles. 

lUd. 8. 62, p. 208. 

It shall not he pcvrdoned in this world nor in the world to 
come ; that is^ neither to the Jews nor to the Gentiles. For 
sceculum hoc, this world, in Scripture, is the period of the 
Jews' synagogue, and ikiKKuv cCUoVy the world to come, is 
taken for the Gospel, or the age of the Messias, frequently 
among the Jews. 

This is, I think, a great and grievous mistake. 
The Eabbis of best name divide into two or three 
periods, the difference being wholly in the words; 
for the dividers by three meant the same as those 
by two. The first was the dies expectationis, or hoc 
sactdunit iv To6T<d Kaip^ : the second dies MessuB, 
the time of the Messiah, that is, the miUenium: the 
third the scBctdum fvturum, or future state, which 
last was absolutely spiritual and celestial. But many 
Eabbis made the dies Messics part, that is, the 
consummation of this world, the conclusive Sabbath 
of the great week, in which they supposed the 
duration of the earth or world of the senses to be 
comprised ; but all agreed that the dies^ or thousand 
years, of the Messiah was a transitional state, during 
which the elect were gradually defecated of body, 
and ripened for the final or spiritual state. During 
the millenium the will of God will be done on earth, 
no less, though in a lower glory, than it will be done 
hereafter in heaven. Now it is to be carefully 
observed that the Jewish doctors or Eabbis (all such 
at least as remained unconverted) had no conception 
or belief of a suffering Messiah, or of a period after 
the birth of the Messiah, previous to the kingdom, 
and of course included in the time of expectatiou. 


The appearance of the Messiah and his assumption 
of the throne of David were to he contemporaneous. 
The Christian doctrine of a suffering Messiah, or of 
Christ as the high priest and intercessor, has of 
course introduced a modification of the Jewish 
scheme. But though there is a seeming discrepance 
in different texts in the first three Gospels, yet the 
Lord's Prayer appears to determine the question in 
favour of the elder and present Eahhinical belief; 
that is, it does not date the dies Messia^ or kingdom 
of the Lord, from his Incarnation, but from a 
second coming in power and gloiy, and hence we 
are taught to pray for it as an event yet future. 
Nay, our Lord himself repeatedly speal^s of the 
Son of Man in the third person, as yet to come. 
Assuredly our Lord ascended the throne and became 
a King on his final departure from his disciples. 
But it was the throne of his Father, and he an 
invisible King, the sovereign Providence to whom 
all power was committed. And this celestial kingdom 
cannot be identified with that under which the 
divine will will be done on earth as it is in heaven; 
that is, when on this earth the Church militant shall 
be one in holiness with the triumphant Church. 
The difficulties, I confess, are great ; and for those 
who believe the first Gospel (and this in its present 
state) to have been composed by the Apostle 
Matthew, or at worst to be a literal and faithful 
translation from a Hebrew (Syro-Chaldaic) Gospel 
written by him, 6uad who furthermore contend for 
its having been word by word dictated by an infallible 
Spirit, the necessary duty of reconciling the different 
passages in the first Gospel with each other, and 
with others in St. Luke's, is, me saltern judiccj a 
most Herculean one. The most consistent and 
rational scheme is, I am persuaded, that which is 


adopted in the Apocalypse. The new creation, 
commencing with our Lord's resurrection, and mea- 
sured as the creation of this world {Jiujus sacvliy 
TovTov atoivos) was by the doctors of the Jewish 
church — namely, as a week — divided into two prin- 
cipal epochs, — the six sevenths or working days, 
during which the Gospel was gradually to be preached 
in all the world, and the number of the elect Med 
up, — and the seventh, the Sabbath of the Messiah, 
or the kingdom of Christ on earth in a new Jerusalem. 
But as the Jewish doctors made the day (or one 
thousand years) of Messiah, a part, because the con- 
summation, of this world, tovtov al-coros, tovtov 
Kaipovt so the first Christians reversely made the 
kingdom commence on the first (symbolical) day of 
the sacred week, the last or seventh day of which 
was to be the complete and glorious manifestation of 
this kingdom. If any one contends that the kingdom 
of the Son of Man, and the re-descent of our Lord 
with his angels in the clouds, are to be interpreted 
spiritually, I have no objection; only you cannot 
pretend that this was the interpretation of the dis- 
ciples. It may be the right, but it was not the 
Apostolic belief. 

Ibid. s. 50, p. 257. 

For this was giving them pardon, by virtue of those words 
of Christ, Whose sins ye remits ihey a/re remitted; that is, if ye, 
who are the stewards of my family, shall admit any one to 
the kingdom of Christ on earth, they shall be admitted to the 
participation of Christ's kingdom in heaven; and what ye 
bind here shall be bomid there ; that is, if they be unworthy 
to partake of Christ here, they shall be accounted unworthy 
to partake of Christ hereafter. 

Then without such a gift of reading the hearts of 
men, as priests do not now pretend to, this text 


meaus almost nothing. A mcked shall not, but a 
good man shall, be admitted to heaven ; for if you 
have with good reason rejected any one here, I will 
reject him hereafter, amounts to no more than the 
rejection or admission of men according to their 
moral fitness or unfitness, the truth or unsoundness 
of their faith and repentance. I rather think that 
the promise, like the miraculous insight which it 
implies, was given to the Apostles and first disciples 
exclusively, and that it referred almost wholly to the 
admission of professed converts to the Church of 

In fine, I have written but few marginal notes to 
this long Treatise, for the whole is to my feeling and 
apprehension so Bomish, so anti-Pauline, so unction* 
less, that it makes my very heart as dry as the desert 
sands, when I read it. Instead of partial animadver- 
sions, I prescribe the chapter on the Law and the 
Gospel in Luther^s Table Talk, as the general 


Ibid, Obj. 4, p. 346. 

But if Original Sin be not a sin properly, why are children 
baptized? And what benefit comes to them by Baptism? 
I answer, as much as they need, and are capable of. 

The eloquent man has plucked just prickles enough 
out of the dogma of Original Sin to make a thick 
and ample crown of thorns for his opponents; and 
yet left enough to tear his own clothes off his back, 
and pierce through the leather jerkin of his closeliest 

* With reference to aU these notes on Original Sin, see Aids to 
Beflection, p. 260-286.— £a. 


wrought logic. In this answer to this objection he 
reminds me of the renowned squire, who first scratched 
out his eyes in a quickset hedge, and then leaped 
back and scratched them in again. So Jeremy Taylor 
first pulls out the very eyes of the doctrine, leaves it 
blind and blank, and then leaps back into it and 
scratches them in agcdn, but with a most opulent 
squint that looks a hundred ways at once, and no one 
can tell which it really looks at. 


By Baptism children are made partakers of the Holy Ghost 
and of the grace of God ; which I desire to be observed in 
opposition to the Pelagian heresy, who did suppose nature 
to be so perfect, that the grace of God was not necessary, and 
that by nature alone, they could go to heaven ; which because 
I affirm to be impossible, and that Baptism is therefore 
necessary, because nature is insufficient, and Baptism is the 
great channel of grace, &c. 

What then of the poor heathens, that is, of five- 
sixths of all mankind? Would more go to hell by 
nature alone ? If so : where is God's justice in 
Taylor's plan more than in Calvin's ? 

Ibid. Obj. 5, p. 356. 

Although I have shewn the great excess and abundance of 
grace by Christ over the evil that did descend by Adam ; yet 
the proportion and comparison lies in the main emanation of 
death from one, and life from the other. 

Does Jeremy Taylor then believe that the sentence 
of death on Adam and his sons extended to the soul ; 
that death was to be absolute cessation of being! 
Scarcely I hope. But if bodily only, where is the 
difference between ante and post Christum ? 

VOL. I. ^ 


Ibid. p. 356. 

Not that Gk>d could be the author of a sin to any, but that 
he appointed the evil which is the consequent of sin, to be 
upon their heads who descended from the sinner. 

Rare justice ! and this too in a tract written to 
rescue God*s justice from the Supra- and Sub-lapsa- 
rians ! How quickly would Taylor have detected in 
an adversary the absurd realisation contained in this 
and the following passages of the abstract notion, sin, 
from the sinner : as if sin were anything but a man 
sinning, or a man who has sinned ! As well might 
a sin committed in Sirius or the planet Saturn justify 
the infliction of conflagration on the earth and hell- 
flre on all its rational inhabitants. Sin ! the word 
sin ! for abstracted from the sinner it is no more : and 
if not abstracted from him, it remains separate from 
all others. 

Ibid. p. 358. 

The consequent of this discourse must needs at least be 
this ; that it is impossible that the greatest part of mankind 
should be lefb in the eternal bonds of hell by Adam ; for then 
quite contrary to the discourse of the Apostle, there had 
been abimdance of sin, but a scarcity of grace. 

And yet Jeremy Taylor will not be called a Pela- 
gian. Why ? Because without grace superadded by 
Christ no man could be saved : that is, all men must 
go to hell, and this not for any sin, but from a cala- 
mity, the consequences of another man's sin, of which 
they were even ignorant. God would not condemn 
them the sons of Adam for sin, but only inflicted on 
them an evil, the necessary effect of wlaich was that 
they should all troop to the devil ! And this is Jeremy 
Taylor's defence of God's justice ! The truth is, 


Taylor was a Pelagian, believed that without Christ 
thousands, Jews and heathens, lived wisely and holily, 
and went to heaven ; but this he did not dare say out, 
probably not even to himself ; and hence it is that he 
flounders backward and forward, now upping and now 

In truth, this eloquent Treatise may be compared 
to a statue of Janus, with one face fixed on certain 
opponents, full of life and force, a witty scorn on the 
lip, a brow at once bright and weighty with satisfying 
reason : the other looking at the something instead 
of that which had been confuted, maimed, noseless, 
and weather-bitten into a sort of visionary confusion 
and indistinctness. * It looks like this, — ay, and 
very like that — but how like it is, too, such another 
thing ! 


Ibid. p. 367. 

And they who are bom eunuchs should be less infected 
by Adam's pollution, by having less of concupiscence in the 
great instance of desires. 

The fact happens to be false : and then the vulgarity, 
most unworthy of our dear Jeremy Taylor, of taking 
the mode of the manifestation of the disobedience of 
the will to the reason, for the disobedience itself. St., 
James would have taught him that he who offendeth 
against one, offendeth against all ; and that there is 
some truth in the Stoic paradox that all crimes are 
equal. Equal is indeed a false phrase ; and therein 

* Aids to Reflection, p.274.— iStf. 


consists the paradox, which in ninety-nine cases out 
of a hundred is the same as the falsehood. The 
truth is, they are all the same in kind ; but unequal 
in degree. They are all alike, though not equally, 
against the conscience. 

Ibid. p. 369. 

So that there is no necessity of a third place ; but it con- 
cludes only that in the state of separation from God*s presence 
there is great variety of degrees and kinds of evil, and every 
one is not the extreme. 

What is this ? If hell be a state, and not a mere 
place, and a particular state, its meaning must in 
common sense be a state of the worst sort. If then 
there be a mere pana damni, that is, the not being so 
blest as some others may be ; this is a different state 
in genere from the jpcsna sensus : ergOf not hell ; ergo 
rather a third state ; or else heaven. For every 
angel must be in it, than whom another angel is 
happier ; that is negatively damned, though positively 
very happy. 

Ibid. pp. 370-1. 

Just so it is in infants : hell was not made for man, but 
for devils ; and therefore it must be something besides mere 
nature that can bear any man thither : mere nature goes 
neither to heaven or hell. 

And how came the devils there ? If it be hard to 
explain how Adam fell ; how much more hard to solve 
how purely spiritual beings could fall ? And nature ! 
What? so much of nature, and no kind of attempt at 
a definition of the word ? Pray what is nature ? 


md, p. 371. 

I do not Bay that we, by that sin (original) deserved that 
death, neither can death be properly ar punishment of us, till 
we superadd some evil of our own ; yet Adam's sin deserved 
it, so that it was justly left to fall upon us, we, as a conse- 
quent and punishment of his sin, being [reduced to our 
natural portion. 

How ? What is this but flying to the old Supra- 
lapsarian blasphemy of a right of property in God 
over all his creatures, and destroying that sacred dis- 
tinction between person and thing, which is the light 
and the life of all law human and divine ? Mercy on 
us ! Is not agony, is not the stone, is not blindness, 
is not ignorance, are not headstrong, inherent, innate, 
and connate passions driving us to sin when reason is 
least able to withhold us, — are not all these punish- 
ments, grievous punishments, and are they not inflicted 
on the innocent babe ? Is not this the rennet infused 
into the milk not mingled of St. Peter ;* spotting the 
immaculate begotten, souring and curdling the inno- 
cence without sin or m>alice ?\ And if this be just, 
and compatible with God's goodness, why all this 
outcry against St. Austin and the Calvinists and the 
Lutherans, whose whole addition is a lame attempt to 
believe guilt, where they cannot find it, in order to 
justify a punishment which they do find ? 

Ibid. p. 379. 

But then for the evil of punishment, that may pass farther 
than the action. If it passes upon the innocent, it is not a 
punishment to them, but an evil inflicted by right of 
dominion ; but yet by reason of the relation of the afflicted 
to him that sinned, to him it is a punishment. 

Here the snake peeps out, and now takes its tail 

• Ante. Vlndicaaon, &c. pp. 867-8. t iW*. 


into its mouth. Eight of dominion ! Nonsense ! 
Things are not objects of right or wrong. Power of 
dominion I understand, and right of judgment I 
understand ; but right of dominion can have no 
immediate, but only a relative, sense. I have a right 
of dominion over this estate, that is, relatively to all 
other persons. But if there be a jm dominandi over 
rational and free agents, then why blame Calvin? 
For all attributes are then merged in blind power : 
and God and fate are the same : 

Strange Trinity ! God, Necessity, and the Devil. 
But Taylor's scheme has far worse consequences than 
Calvin's : for it makes the whole scheme of Redemp- 
tion a theatrical scenery. Just restore our bodies 
and corporeal passions to a perfect equilibrium and 
fortunate instinct, and, there being no guilt or defect 
in the soul, the Son of God, the Logos, and Supreme 
Reason, might have remained unincamate, uncrucified. 
In short, Socinianism is as inevitable a deduction 
from Taylor's scheme as Deism or Atheism is from 

In fine » 

The whole of Taylor's confusion originated in this ; 
— first, that he and his adversaries confound original 
with hereditary sin ; but chiefly that neither he nor 
his adversaries had considered that guilt must be a 
noumenon; but that our images, remembrances, and 
consciousnesses of our actions are phtenomena. Now 
the phenomenon is in time, and an effect : but the 
noumenon is not in time any more than it is in 
space. The guilt has been before we are even 
conscious of the action ; therefore an original sin 
(that is, a sin universal and essential to man as man. 


and yet guilt, and yet choice, and yet amenable to 
punishment) may be at once true and yet in direct 
contradiction to all our reasonings derived from pha- 
nomena, that is, fects of time and space. But we 
ought not to apply the categories of appearance to 
the oirrcas ovra of the intelligible or causative world. 
This (I should say of Original Sin) is mystery ! We 
do not so properly believe it, as we know it. What 
is actual must be possible. But if we will confound 
actuals with reals, and apply the rules of the latter 
to cases of the former, we must blame ourselves for 
the clouds and darkness and storms of opposing 
winds, which the error will not fail to raise. By the 
same process an Atheist may demonstrate the con- 
tradictory nature of eternity, of a being at once 
infinite and of resistless causality, and yet intelligent. 
Jeremy Taylor additionally puzzled himself with 
Adam, instead of looking into ihe fact in himself. 

How came it that Taylor did not apply the same 
process to the congeneric question of the freedom of 
the will ? In half a dozen syllogisms he must have 
gyved and hand-cuffed himself into blank necessity 
and mechanic motions. All hangs together. Deny 
Original Sin, and you will soon deny free will ; — then 
virtue and vice; — ^and God becomes Abracadabra; 
a sound, nothing else. 


Ibid. pp. 390-1. 

To this it is answered as you see, there is a double guilt ; a 
guilt of person, and of nature. That is taken away, this is 
not : for sacraments are given to persons, not to natures. 

I need no other passage but this to convince me 
that Jeremy Taylor, the angle in which the two 


apices of logic and rhetoric meet, consummate in 
both, was yet no metaphysician. Learning, fancy, 
discursive intellect, tria juncta in uno, and of each 
enough to have alone immortalised a man, he had ; 
but yet ovblv /uterd <l>v(riv. Images, conceptions, 
notions, such as leave him but one rival, Shakspeare, 
there were ; but no ideas. Taylor was a Gassendist. 
Oh that he had but meditated in the silence of his 
spirit on the mystery of an I AM! He would have 
seen that a person, quoad person, can have nothing 
common or generic ; and that where this finds place, 
the person is corrupted by introsusception of a nature, 
which becomes evil thereby, and on this relation only 
is an evil nature. The nature itself, like all other 
works of God, is good, and so is the person in a yet 
higher sense of the word, good, like all offsprings of 
the Most High. But the combination is evil, and 
this not the work of God ; and one of the main ends 
and results of the doctrine of Original Sin is to 
silence and confute the blasphemy that makes God 
the author of sin, without avoiding it by fleeing to 
the almost equal blasphemy against the conscience, 
that sin in the sense of guilt does not exist. 


Perhaps the most wonderful of all Taylor s works. 
He seems, if I may so say, to have transubstantiated 
his vast imagination and fancy into subtlety not to 
be evaded, acuteness to which nothing remains un- 
pierceable, and indefatigable agility of argumentation. 
Add to these an exhaustive erudition, and that all 
these are employed in the service of reason and 


common sense ; whereas in some of his Tracts he 
seems to wield all sorts of wisdom and wit in defence 
of all sorts of folly and stupidity. But these were 
ad popellum, and by virtue of the faUitas dispensativat 
which he allowed himself. 

Epist. dedicatory. 
The question of transubstantiation. 

I have no doubt that if the Pythagorean bond had 
successfully established itself, and become a powerful 
secular hierarchy, there would have been no lack of 
furious partisans to assert, yea, and to deunn and 
bum such as dared deny, that one was the same as 
two ; two being two in the same sense as one is one ; 
that consequently 2 + 2 = 2 and 1+1 = 4. But I 
should most vehemently doubt that this was the 
intention of Pythagoras, or the sense in which the 
mysterious dogma was understood by the thinking 
part of his disciples, who nevertheless were its pro- 
fessed believers. I should be prepared to find that 
the true import and purport of the article was no 
more than this ; — ^that the one in order to its mani- 
festation must appear in and as two ; that the act of 
re-union was simultaneous with that of the self- 
production, (in the geometrical use of the word * pro- 
duce,' as when a point produces, or evolves, itself on 
each side into a bipolar line), and that the Triad is 
therefore the necessary form of the Monad. 

Even so is the dispute concerning Transubstan- 
tiation. I can easily believe that a thousand monks 
and friars would pretend, as Taylor says, to * dis- 
believe their eyes and ears, and defy their own 
reason,' and to receive the dogma in the sense, or 
rather in the nonsense, here ascribed to it by him, 
namely, that the phenomenal bread and wine were 


the phenomenal flesh and hlood. But I likewise 
know that the respectable Roman Catholic theolo- 
gians state the article free from a contradiction in 
terms at least; namely, that in the consecrated 
elements the noumena of the phenomenal bread and 
wine are the same with that which was the noumenon 
of the phenomenal flesh and blood of Christ when 
on earth. 

Let M represent a slab or plane of mahogany, and 
m its ordinary supporter or under-prop ; and let S 
represent a slab or plane of silver, and s its supporter. 
Now to affirm that M = S is a contradiction, or that 
m=s; but it is no contradiction to say, that on 
certain occasions (S having been removed) s is sub- 


stituted for m, and that what was , is by the 

m •' 

command of the common master changed into 


It may be false in fact, but it is not a self-contra- 
diction in the terms. The mode in which 5 subsists 

M . 

in may be inconceivable, but not more so than the 


mode in which m subsists in , or that in which 5 


subsisted in . 

I honestly confess that I should confine my 

grounds of opposition to the article thus stated to 

its unnecessariness, to the want of sufficient proofs 

from Scripture that I am bound to believe or trouble 

my head with it. I am sure that Bishop Bull, who 

really did believe the Trinity, without either Tritheism 

or Sabellianism, could not consistently have used the 

argument of Taylor or of Tillotson in proof of the 

absurdity of Transubstantiation. 


Ibid, p. 416. 

But for our dear afflicted mother, she is under the portion 
of a child in the state of discipline, her government indeed 
hindered, but her worshippings the same, the articles as true, 
and those of the church of Rome as false as ever. 

Oh how much there is in these few words, — the 
sw/Bet and comely sophistry, not of Taylor, but of 
human nature. Mother ! child ! state of discipline ! 
government hindered ! that is to say, in how many 
instances, scourgings hindered, dungeoning in dens 
foul as those of hell, mutilation of ears and noses, 
and flattering the King mad with assertions of his 
divine right to govern without a Parliament, hindered. 
The best apology for Laud, Sheldon, and their fellows 
will ever be that those whom they persecuted were 
as great persecutors as themselves, and much less 

Ibid, s. 2, p. 422. 

In Synaxi T^cmsvhstomtiottionem sero definivU Ecdesia ; diu 
satis erat crederCf aive suh pcme consecrcUo, sive quocvmque modo 
adesse vervm corpnis Christi ; so said the great Erasmus. 

Verum corpuSf that is, res ipsissimat or the thing 
in its actual self, opposed r^ <t>aLvoixiv(a, 

Ibid, B. 6, p. 425. 

Now that the spiritual is also a real presence, and that they 
are hugely consistent, is easily credible to them that believe 
the gifts of the Holy Qhost are real graces, and a spirit is a 
proper substance. 

But how the body of Christ, as opposed to his 
Spirit and to his Godhead, can be taken spiritually, 
hie labor, hoc opus est Plotinus says, koI f( {fA.T\ 


a<r(0fiaro9 ; so we must say here koX to tr&yia 

Ibid, 8. 7, p. 426. 

So we may say of the blessed Sacrament ; Christ is more 
truly and really present in spiritual presence than in 
corporal ; in the heavenly effect than in the natural being. 

But the presence of Christ is not in question, but 
the presence of Christ's body and blood. Now that 
Christ effected much for us by coming in the body, 
which could not or would not have been effected had 
he not assumed the body, we all, Socinians excepted, 
believe : but that his body effected it, other than as 
Christ in the body, where shall we find ? how can we 
understand ? 

Ibid. p. 427. 

So when it is said. Flesh and blood shall not inherit the 
kingdom of Ood, that is, corruption shall not inherit ; and in 
the resurrection, our bodies are said to be spiritual, that is, 
not in substance, but in effect and operation. 

This is, in the first place, a wilful interpretation, 
and secondly, it is absurd ; for what sort of flesh and 
blood would incorruptible flesh and blood be ? As 
well might we speak of marble flesh and blood. But 
in Taylor's mind, as seen throughout, the logician 
was predominant over the philosopher, and the fancy 
outbustled the pure intuitive imagination. In the 
sense of St. Paul, as of Plato and all other dynamic 
philosophers, flesh and blood is ipso facto corruption, 
that is, the spirit of life in the mid or balancing state 
between fixation and reviviscence. Who shall deliver 
me from the body of this death ? is a Hebraism for 
' this death whicla the body is.' For matter itself is 
but qdritus in coagulo, and organised matter the 


coaguLum in the act of being restored; it is then 
repotentiating. Stop its self-destruction as matter, 
and you stop its self-reproduction as a vital organ. 
In short, Taylor seems to fall into the very fault he 
reproves in Bellarmine, and with this additional evil, 
that his reasoning looks more like tricking or explaining 
away a mystery. For wherein does the Sacrament of 
the Eucharist differ from that of Baptism, nay, even 
of grace before meat, when performed fervently and 
in faith ? Here too Christ is present in the hearts of 
the faithful by blessing and grace. I see at present 
no other way of interpreting the text so as not to make 
the Sacrament a mere arbitrary memento, but by 
an implied negative. In propriety, the word is con- 
fined to no portion of corporality in particular. * This 
(the bread and wine) are as truly my flesh and blood 
as the phanomena which you now behold and name 
as such.* 

Ibid. s. 9, p. 429. 

From this paragraph I conclude, though not without 
some perplexity, that by * the body and blood verily 
and indeed taken,* we are not to understand body and 
blood in their limited sense, as contradistinguished 
from the soul or Godhead of Christ, but as a 
periphrasis for Christ himself, or at least Christ's 
humanity. Taylor, however, has misconstrued Pha- 
vorinus' meaning though not his words. Spiritualia 
etema quoad spiritum. But this is the very depth of 
the purified Platonic philosophy. 

Ibid. 8. 10, p. 430. 

But because the words do perfectly declare our sense, and 
are owned publicly in our doctrine and manner of speaking, 
it will be in vain to object against us those words of the 


Fathers, which use the same expressions : for if by virtue of 
those words, * really/ * substantiidly, " corporally, " verily and 
indeed,' and ' Christ's body and blood,' the Fathers shall be 
supposed to speak for Transubstantiation, they may as well 
suppose it to be our doctrine too; for we use the same 
words, and therefore those authorities must signify nothing 
against us, unless these words can be proved in them to 
signify more than our sense of them does import ; and by 
this truth, many, very many of their pretences are evacuated. 

A sophism, dearest Jeremy. We use the words 
because these early Fathers used them, and have 
forced our own definitions on them. But should we 
have chosen these words to express our opinion by, if 
there had been no controversy on the subject ? But 
the Fathers chose and selected these words as the 
most obvious and natural. 

Ibid. s. 11, p. 431. 

It is much insisted upon that it be inquired whether, 
when we say we believe Christ's body to be really in the 
Sacrament, we mean ' that body, that flesh, that was bom 
of the Virgin Mary, that was crucified, dead, and buried V 
I answer, that I know none else that he had or hath : there 
is but one body of Christ natural and glorified. 

This may be true, or at least intelligible, of Christ's 
humanity or personcd identity as vdrjTov ri, but 
applied to the phenomenal flesh and blood, it is non- 
sense. For if every atom of the human frame be 
changed by succession in eleven or twelve years, the 
body bom of the Virgin could not be the body cruci- 
fied, much less the body crucified be the body glorified, 
spiritual and incorruptible. I construe the words of 
Clement of Alexandria, quoted by Taylor below,* 

* DupUeiter vero aanguia Christi et caro intelligitur, spirititalis Ula atque 
divinOf de qua ipse dixit, Caro mea vere est cibus, <bc., vel caro et Banguia^ qua 
crticifixa estf et qui mHiiia effuaus e«( lancea. In Epist. Ephes. c. i. 


literally, and they perfectly express my opinion ; 
namely, that Christ, both in the institution of the 
Eucharist and in the sixth chapter of John, spoke of 
his humanity as a noumenon, not of the specific flesh 
and blood which Trere its phcmomena at the last 
supper and on the cross. But Jeremy Taylor was a 
semi-materialist, and though no man better managed 
the logic of substance and accidents, he seems to have 
formed no clear metaphysical notion of their actual 
meaning. Taken notionally, they are mere inter- 
changeable relations, as in concentric circles the 
outmost circumference is the substance, the other 
circles its accidents ; but if I begin with the second, 
and exclude the first from my thoughts, then this is 
substance and the interior ones accidents, and so on ; 
but taken really, we mean the complex action of co- 
agents on our senses, and accident as only an agent 
acting on us. Thus we say, the beer has turned 
sour: sour is the accident of the substance beer. 
But, in fact, a new agent, oxygen, has united itself 
with other agents in the joint composition, the essence 
of which new comer is to be sour : at all events, 
Taylor's construction is a mere assertion, meaning no 
more than * in this sense only can I subscribe to the 
words of Bertram, Jerome, and Clement.* 

If a re-union of the Lutheran and English Churches 
with the Eoman were desirable and practicable, the 
best way, its ifxoLyc Sofcet, would be, that any remark- 
able number should offer union on a given profession 
of faith chiefly negative, as we protest against the 
authority of the Church in temporals ; that the words 
agreed to by Beza and Espencseus, on the part of the 
Reformers and Eomanists respectively, at Poissy, 
used with implicit faith, shall sufl&ce. Credimus in 
xisu coencB DominiccB verCy reipsa, svhstantialiter, seu 
in substantia, verum corpis et sanguinem Chvi&ti 


spirituali et ineffabili modo esse, exhiberi, sumi a 
fidelibxis communicantibus. 

Ibid. s. 3, p. 434. 

The other Schoolman I am to reckon in this account, is 
Gkkbriel Biel. 

Taylor should have informed the reader that Gabriel 
Biel is but the echo of Occam, and that both were 
ante-Lutheran Protestants in heart, and as feir as thej 
dared, in word likewise. 

Ibid. s. 6, p. 436. 

So that i£, according to the Casuists, especially of the 
Jesuits* order, it be lawful to follow the opinion of any one 
probable doctor, here we have five good men and true, 
besides Occam, Bassolis, and Mechior Camus, to acquit us 
from our search after this question in Scripture. 

Taylor might have added Erasmus, who, in one 
of his letters, speaking of Oecokmpadius's writings 
on the Eucharist, says, * ut seduci posse videantur 
etiam electi^* and adds, that he should have embraced 
his interpretations, *nisi obstaret consensus Ecclesia;' 
that is, Oecolampadius has convinced me, and I should 
avow my conviction, but for motives of personal pru- 
dence and regard for the public peace. 


Ibid. p. 436. 

I cannot but think that the same mysterious truth, 
whatever it be, is referred to in the Eucharist and in 
this chapter of St. John ; and I wonder that Taylor, 
who makes the Eucharist a spiritual sumption of 


Christ, sbould object to it. A=C and B=C, there- 
fore A =B.* 

Ibid, 8. 4, p. 440. 

The error on both sides, Roman and Protestant, 
originates in the confusion of sign or figure with 
symbol, which latter is always an essential psirt of 
that, of the whole of which it is the representative. 
Not seeing this, and therefore seeing no medium 
between the whole thing and the mere metaphor of 
the thing, the Romanists took the former or positive 
pole of the error, the Protestants the latter or negative 
pole. The Eucharist is a symbolic, or solemnising 
and totum in parte acting of an act, which in a true 
member of Christ's body is supposed to be perpetual. 
Thus the husband and wife exercise the duties of their 
marriage contract of love, protection, obedience, and 
the Uke, all the year long, and yet solemnise it by a 
more deliberate and reflecting act of the same love 
on the anniversary of their marriage. 

Ibid, 8. 9, pp. 447-8. 

That which neither can feel or be felt, see or be seen, 
move or be moved, change or be changed, neither do or 
suffer corporally, cannot certainly be eaten corporally ; but 
so they affirm concerning the body of our blessed Lord ; it 
cannot do or suffer corporally in the Sacrament, therefore 
it cannot be eaten corporally, any more than a man can 
chew a spirit, or eat a meditation, or swallow a syllogism 
into his belly. 

Absurd as the doctrine of Transubstantiation may 
thus be made, yet Taylor here evidently confounds a 
spirit, ens realissimum, with a mere notion or em 

* See Table Talk, p. 72, second edit.— 2£<2. 
VOL. t T5 


logicum. On this ground of the spirituality of all 
powers, bvvdii€LS, it would not be difficult^lo evade 
many of Taylor's most plausible arguments. Enough, 
however, and more than enough would be left in their 
full force. 

Ibid. p. 448. 

Besides this, I say this corporal union of our bodies to 
the body of God incarnate^ which these great and witty 
dreamers dream of, would make man to be God. 

But yet not God, nor absolutely. I am in my 
Father, even so ye are in me. 

Ibid, s. 22, p. 456. 

By this time I hope I may conclude, that Transubstan- 
tiation is not taught by our blessed Lord in the sixth chapter 
of St. John: Johannes de tertia et Etbcharistica coma, whSl 
quidem scribit, eo quod ccsteri trea EvangdiaUB ante ilium earn 
plene descripsiasent. They are the words of Stapleton and 
are good evidence against them. 

I cannot satisfy my mind with this reason, though 
the one commonly assigned both before and since 
Stapleton: and yet ignorant, when, why, and for 
whom John wrote his Gospel, I cannot substitute a 
better or more probable one. That John believed the 
command of the Eucharist to have ceased with the 
destruction of the Jewish state, and the obligation of 
the cup of blessing among the Jews, — or that he 
wrote it for the Greeks, unacquainted with the Jewish 
custom, — would be not improbable, did we not know 
that the' Eastern Church, that of Ephesus included, 
not only continued this Sacrament, but rivalled the 
Western Church in the superstition thereof. 


Ibid. s. 1, p. 603. 

Now I argue thus : if we eat Christ's natural body, we 
eat it either naturally or spiritually; if it be eaten only 
spiritually, then it is spiritually digested, &c. 

What an absurdity in the word * it' in this passage 
and throughout! 

Vol. X. s. 3, p. 3. 

The accidents, proper to a substance, are for the manifes- 
tation, a notice of the substance, not of themselves ; for as 
the man feels, but the means by which he feels is the 
sensitive faculty, so that which is felt, is the substance, and 
the means by which it is felt is the accident. 

This is the language of common sense, rightly so 
called, that is, truth without regard or reference to 
error ; thus only differing from the language of ge- 
nuine philosophy, ^ich is truth intentionally guarded 
against error. But then in order to have supported 
it against an acute antagonist, Taylor must, I suspect, 
have renounced his Gassendis and other Christian 
Epicuri. His antagonist would tell him; when a 
man strikes me with a stick, I feel the stick, and 
infer the man ; but pari rationed I feel the blow, and 
infer the stick ; and this is tantamount to, — I feel, 
and by a mechanism of my thinking organ attribute 
causation to precedent or co-existent images ; and this 
no less in states in which you call the images unreal, 
that is, in dreams, than when they are asserted by you 
to have an outward reality. 

IMd, p. 4. 

But when a man, by the ministry of the senses, is led into 
the apprehension of a wrong object, or the belief of a &lse 
proposition, then he is made to believe a lie, &c. 

There are no means by which a man without 

TT 9 


chemical knowledge could distinguish two similarly 
shaped lumps, one of sugar and another of sugar of 
lead. Well ! a lump of sugar of lead lies among other 
artefacts on the shelf of a collector ; and with it a 
label, * Take care ! this is not sugar, though it looks 
so, but crystallised oxide of lead, and it is a deadly 
poison.' A man reads this label, and yet takes and 
swallows the lump. Would Taylor assert that the 
man was made to swallow a poison ? Now this (would 
the Romanist say) is precisely the case of the conse- 
crated elements, only putting food and antidote for 
poison ; that is, as far as this argument of Jeremy 
Taylor is concerned. 

Ibid, p. 5. 

Just upon this account it is, that St. John's argument had 
been just nothing in behalf of the whole religion : for that 
God was incarnate, that Jesus Christ did such miracles, that 
he was crucified, that he arose again^ and ascended into 
heaven, that he preached these sermons, that he gave such 
commandments, he was made to believe by sounds, by shapes, 
by figures, by motions, by likenesses, and appearances, of all 
the proper accidents. 

A Socinian might turn this argument with equal 
force at least, but I think with far greater, against the 
Incarnation. But it is a sophism, that actually did 
lead to Socinianism : for surely bread and wine are 
less disparate from flesh and blood, than a human 
body from the Omnipresent Spirit. The disciples 
would, according to Taylor, Tillotson, and the other 
Latitudinarian common sense divines, have been 
justified in answering : * All our senses tell us you 
are only a man : how should we believe you when you 
say the contrary ? If we are not to believe all our 
senses, much less can we believe that we actually 
hear you.' 


And Taylor in my humble judgment gives a force 
and extension to the words of St. John, quoted before, 
— That which was from the beginning, which we have 
seen with our eyes, which we have beheld, and our 
hands have handled of the word of life (1 Ep. 1.), — 
far greater than they either can, or were meant to, 
bear. It is beyond all doubt, that the words refer 
to, and were intended to confute, the heresy which 
was soon after a prominent doctrine of the Gnostics ; 
namely, that the body of Christ was a phantom. To 
this St. John replies : I have myself had every proof 
to the contrary ; first, the proof of the senses ; 
secondly, Christ's own assurance. Now this was 
unanswerable by the Gnostics, without one or the 
other of two pretences ; either that St. John and the 
other known and appointed Apostles and delegates of 
the Word were liars ; or that the Epistle was spurious. 
The first was too intolerable : therefore they adopted 
the second. Observe, the heretics, whom St. John 
confutes, did not deny the actual presence of the 
Word with the appearance of a human body, much 
less the truth of the wonders performed by the Word 
in this super- human and unearthly vice-corpus, or 
quasi-corpus : least of all, would they assert either 
that the assurances of the Word were false in them- 
selves, or that the sense of hearing might have been 
permitted to deceive the beloved Apostle, (which would 
have been virtual falsehood and a subornation of false- 
hood), however liable to deception the senses might 
be generally, and as sole and primary proofs unsup- 
ported by antecedent grounds, prcecognitis vel precon- 
cessis. And that St. John never thought of advancing 
the senses to any such dignity and self-sufficiency as 
proofs, it would be easy to show from twenty passages 
of his Gospel. I say, again and again, that I myself 
greatly prefer the general doctrine of our own Church 


respecting the Eucharist, — rem credimus, modum 
nescimusj — to either Tran-(or Con-)substantiation, on 
the one hand, or to the mere ngnum memories cama 
of the Sacramentaries. But nevertheless, I think 
that the Protestant divines laid too much stress on the 
abjuration of the metaphysical part of the Roman 
article ; as if, even with the admission of Transub- 
stantiation, the adoration was not forbidden and made 
idolatrous by the second commandment. 

Ihid, 8. 6; p. 9. 

And yet no sense can be deceived m that which it always 
perceives alike : ' The touch can never be deceived.' 

Every common juggler falsifies this assertion when 
he makes the pressure from a shilling seem the shil- 
ling itself. * Are you sure you feel it ? ' * Yes.* 
* Then open your hand. Presto ! 'Tis gone.* From 
this I gather that neither Taylor nor Aristotle ever 
had the nightmare. 

Ibid, p. 10. 

The purpose of which discourse is this : that no notices 
are more evident and more certain than the notices of sense ; 
but if we conclude contrary to the true dictate of senses, 
the fault is in the understanding, collecting feJse conclusions 
from right premises. It follows, therefore, that in the 
matter of the Eucharist we ought to judge that which our 
senses tell us. 

Very unusually lax reasoning for Jeremy Taylor, 
whose logic is commonly legitimate even where his 
metaphysic is unsatisfactory. What Romanist ever 
asserted that a communicant's palate deceived him, 
when it reported the taste of bread or of wine in the 
elements ? 


Ibid, 8. 1, p. 16. 

When we discoxirse of mysteries of faith and articles of 
religion, it is certain that the greatest reason in the world, 
to which all other reasons must yield, is this — ' Qod hath 
said it, therefore it is true.' 

Doubtless: it is a syllogism demonstrative. All 
that God says is truth, is necessarily true. But God 
hath said this ; ergoy &c. But how is the minor to 
be proved, that God hath said this? By reason? 
But it is against reason. By the senses ? But it is 
against the senses. 

Ibid. s. 12, p. 27. 

First ; for Christ's body, his natural body, is changed into 
a spiritual body, and it is not now a natural body, but a 
spiritual, and therefore cannot be now in the Sacrament after 
a natural manner, because it is so no where, and therefore 
not there : It is aovm a naiwral "body, it is raised a ^ritual 

But mercy on me ! was this said of the resurgent 
body of Jesus ? a spiritual body, of which Jesus said 
it was not a spirit. If tangible by Thomas's fingers, 
why not by his teeth, that is, manducable ? 

lUd, s. 28, p. 44. 

So that if there were a plain revelation of Transubstan- 
tiation, then this argument were good ♦ ♦ ♦ when there 
are so many seeming Impossibilities brought against tlie 
Holy Trinity. * * ♦ And therefore we have found diffi- 
culties, and shall for ever, till, in this article, the Church 
returns to her ancient simplicity of expression. 

Taylor should have said, it would have very greatly 
increased the difficulty of proving that it was really 
revealed, but supposing that certain, then doubtless it 


must be believed as fieur as nonsense can be believed, 
that is, negatively. From the Apostles* Creed it may 
be possible to deduce the Catholic doctrine of the 
Trinity ; but assuredly it is not fully expressed therein : 
and what can Taylor mean by the Church returning 
to her first simplicity in this article ? What less could 
she say if she taught the doctrine at all, than that 
the Word and the Spirit are spoken of everywhere in 
Scripture as individuals, each distinct from the other, 
and both from the Father : that of both, all the divine 
attributes are predicated, except self-origination ; that 
the Spirit is God, and the Word is God, and that they 
with the Father are the one God ? And what more 
does she say now? But Taylor, like Swift, had a 
strong tendency to Sabellianism. 

It is most dangerous, and, in its distant conse- 
quences, subversive of all Christianity to admit, as 
Taylor does, that the doctrine of the Trinity is at all 
against, or even above, human reason in any other 
sense, than as eternity and Deity itself are above it. 
In the former, as well as the latter, we can prove that 
so it must be, and form clear notions by negatives and 

Ibid. B. 29, p. 45. 

Now concerning this, it is certain it implies a contra- 
diction, that two bodies should be in one place, or possess 
the place of another, till that be cast forth. 

So far from it, that I believe the contrary ; and it 
would puzzle Taylor to explain a thousand phcBnomena 
in chemistry on his certainty. But Taylor assumed 
matter to be wholly quantitative, which granted, his 
opinion would become certain. 


Ibid. 8. 32, p. 49. 

The door might be made to 3rield to his Creator as easily 
as water^ which is fluid, be made firm under his feet ; for 
consistence or lability are not essential to wood and water. 

Here the common basis of water^ ice, vapour, steam, 
aqua crystallina, and (possibly) water-gas is called 
water, and confounded with the species water, that is, 
the common base pluis a given proportion of caloric. 
To the species water continuity and lability are 

Ibid, p. 60. 

The words in the text are K€K\€iff(i4v(uv ruv Ovp&v in the 
past tense, the gates or doors having been shut ; but that 
they were shut in the instant of Christ's entry, it says not: 
they might of course, if Christ had so pleased, have been 
insensibly opened, and shut in like manner again ; and, if 
the words be observed, it will appear that St John mentioned 
the shutting the doors in relation to the Apostles' fear, not 
to Christ's entering : he intended not (so £w as appears) to 
declare a miracle. 

Thank God ! Here comes common sense. 

Ibid. ss. 16-17, pp. 71-73. 

All most excellent; but oh that Taylor's stu- 
pendous wit, subtlety, acuteness, learning and inex- 
haustible copiousness of argiimentation would but tell 
us what he himself. Dr. Jeremy Taylor, means by 
eating Christ's body by faith : his body, not his soul 
or Godhead. Eat a body by fEuth ! 


Part I. 

lUd. 8. 2, p. 137. 

The sentence of the Fathers in the third general Council, 
that at EphesuB ; — * That it should not be lawful for any man 
to publish or compose another faith or creed than that which 
was defined by the Nicene Council.' 

Upon what ground then does the Church of Eng- 
land reconcile with this decree its reception of the 
so-called Athanasian creed ? 

Ibid, 8. i, p. 145. 

We consider that the doctrines upon which it (Purgatory) 
is pretended reasonable, are all dubious, and disputable at 
the very best. Such are * * * ♦ that the taking away 
the guilt of sins does not suppose the taking away the 
obligation to pimishment; that is, that when a man's sin is 
pardoned, he may be punished without the guilt of that sin 
as justly as with it. 

The taking away the guilt does not, however, 
imply of necessity the natural removal of the conse- 
quences of sin. And in this sense, I suppose, the 
subtler Komanists would defend this accursed doc- 
trine. A man may have bitterly repented and 
thoroughly reformed the sin of drunkenness, and by 
this genuine metanoia and faith in Christ crucified, 
have obtained forgiveness of the guilt, and yet con- 
tinue to suffer a heavy punishment in a schirrous 
liver or incurable dyspepsy. But who authorised 
the Popes to extend this to the soul ? 


Ibid, p. 163. 
St Ambrose eaith that 'death is a haven of rest.' 

Consider the strange and oftentimes awM dreams 
accompanying the presence of irritating matter in the 
lower abdomen, and the seeming appropriation of 
particular sorts of dream images and incidents to 
affections of particular orgsms and viscera. Do the 
material causes act positively, so that with the re- 
moval of the body by death the total cause is removed, 
and of course the effects ? Or only negatively and 
indirectly, by lessening and suspending that continuous 
texture of organic sensation, which, by drawing out- 
ward the attention of the soul, sheaths her from her 
own state and its corresponding activities ? — ^A fearful 
question, which I too often agitate, and which agitates 
me even in my dreams, when most commonly I am 
in one of Swedenborg's hells, doubtful whether I am 
once more to be awaked, and thinking our dreams to 
be the true state of the soul disembodied when not 
united with Christ. On awaking from such dreams, 
I never fail to find some local pain, circor or infror 
umbilical, with kidney affections, and at the base of 
the bladder. 


p. 227. 

But yet because I will humour J. S. for this once ; even 
here also * The Dissuasive ' relies upon a first and self-evident 
principle as any is in Christianity, and that 'm, Qaod^mum 

I am surprised to meet such an assertion in so 
acute a logician and so prudent an advocate as Jeremy 
Taylor. If the quod primum verum mean the first 
preaching or first institution of Christianity by its 


divine Founder, it is doubtless an evident inference 
from the assumed truth of Christianity, or, if you 
please, evidently implied therein; but surely the 
truth of the Christian system, composed of historical 
narrations, doctrines, precepts, and arguments, is no 
self-evident position, still less, if there be any tenable 
distinction between the words, a primary truth. How 
then can an inference from a particular, a variously 
proveable and proof-requiring, position be itself a 
universal and self-evident one ? But if qiiod primum 
verum means quod prius vervus^ this again is far from 
being of universal application, much less self-evident. 
Astrology was prior to astronomy ; the Ptolemaic to 
the Newtonian scheme. It must therefore be confined 
to history : yet even thus, it is not for any practicable 
purpose necessarily or always true. Increase in other 
knowledge, physical, anthropological, and psycholo- 
gical, may enable an historian of a.d. 1800 to give a 
much truer account of certain events and characters 
than the contemporary chroniclers had given, who 
lived in an age of ignorance and superstition. But 
confine the position within yet narrower bounds, 
namely, to Christian antiquity. In addition to all 
other objections, it has this great defect; that it 
takes for granted the very point in dispute, whether 
Christianity was an ojpiis simul et in toto perfectum^ 
or whether the great foundations only were laid by 
Christ while on earth, and by the Apostles, and the 
superstructure or progression of the work entrusted 
to the successors of the Apostles ; and whether for 
that purpose Christ had not promised that his Spirit 
should be always with the Church. Now this growth 
of truth, not only in each individual Christian who 
is indeed a Christian, but likewise in the Church 
of Christ, from age to age, has been affirmed and 
defended by sundry Latitudinarian, Grotian, and 


Sodnian diviDes dven among Protestants: the contrary^ 
therefore, and an inference from the supposition of 
the contrary, can never he pronounced self-evident 
or primary. Jeremy Taylor had nothing to do with 
these mock axioms, hut to ridicule them, as in other 
instances he has so effectually done. It was sufficient 
and easy to shew, that, true or false, the position was 
utterly inapplicahle to the fieu;ts of the Eoman Church; 
that, instead of passing, like the science of the material 
heaven, from dim to clear, from guess to demonstra- 
tion, from mischievous fancies to guiding, profitable 
and powerful truths, it had overbuilt the divinest 
truths by the silliest and not seldom wicked forgeries, 
usurpations and superstitions. J. S.*s very notion of 
proving a mass of histories by simple logic, he would 
have found exposed to his hand with exquisite truth 
and humour by Lucian. — 1810. 

In the preceding note I think I took Taylor's 
words in too literal a sense ; the remarks, however, 
on the common maxim, In rebus fidei, quod prius 
verms, seem to me just and valuable. — 2 March, 

Ihid, p. 297. 

When he talks of being infallible, if the notion be applied 
to his Church, then he means an infallibility antecedent, 
absolute, unconditionate, such as will not pennit the Church 
ever to err, 

Taylor himself was infected with the spirit of 
casuistry, by which saving faith is placed in the 
understanding, and the moral act in the outward 
deed. How infinitely safer the true Lutheran doc- 
trine : God cannot be mocked ; neither will truth, as 
a mere conviction of the understanding, save, nor 
error condemn ; — ^to love truth sincerely is spiritually 
to have truth; and an error becomes a personal 


error, not by its aberration from logic or history, but 
so far as the causes of such error are in the heart, or 
may be traced back to some antecedent un-Christian 
wish or habit ; — ^to watch over the secret movements 
of the heart, remembering ever how deceitful a thing 
it is, and that God cannot be mocked, though we may 
easily dupe ourselves : these, as the ground-work with 
prayer, study of the Scriptures, and tenderness to all 
around us, as the consequents, are the Christian's 
rule, and supersede all books of casuistry, which 
latter serve only to harden our feelings and pollute 
the imagination. To judge from the Roman casuists, 
nay, I ought to say, from Taylor's own Ductor Dtibi- 
tantiunit one would suppose that a man's points of 
belief and smallest determinations of outward con« 
duct,— however pure and charitable his intentions, 
and however holy or blameless the inward source of 
those intentions or convictions in his past and present 
state of moral being, — were like the performance of 
an electrical experiment, and would blow a man's 
salvation into atoms from a mere unconscious mistake 
in the arrangement and management of the apparatus. 
See Livy's account of Tullus Hostilius's unfortunate 
experiment with one of Numa's sacrificial ceremonies. 
The trick not being performed secundum artem, 
Jupiter enraged shot him dead.* Before God our 
deeds, which for him can have no value, gain accept- 
ance in proportion as they are evolutions of our 
spiritual life. He beholds our deeds in our principles. 
For men our deeds have value as efficient causes, 
worth as symptoms. They infer our principles from 
our deeds. Now, as religion or the love of God 

* Jpaum regem tradunt, volventem commentarios Numatj quum ibi occulta 
Mdermia saerificia Jovi Elido /acta invenisset, operatum his saeris se abdidiase; 
ted rum rite initum aut curatum id sacrum esse ; nee solum nuUam ei obUUam 
Oaiestium apeciem, sed ira Jovit, soUicitati prava religione, fulmine ictum 
cum domo conflagrdsse. L. i. c. JXxi.—JSd, 


cannot subsist apart from charity or the love of our 
neighbour, our conduct must be conformable to both. 

Ibid, p. 305. 

Only for their comfort this they might have also observed 
in that book, — that there is not half so much excuse for the 
Papists Bs there is for the Anabaptists; and yet it was but 
an excuse at the best, as appears in those full answers 
I have given to all their arguments, in the last edition of 
that book, among the polemical discourses in folio. 

Nay, dear Bishop! but such an excuse, as com- 
pared with your after attempt to evacuate it, resembles 
a coat of mail of your own forging, which you boil, in 
order to melt it away into invisibility. You only hide 
it by foam and bubbles, by wavelets and steam-clouds, 
of ebullient rhetoric ; I speak of the Anabaptists as 

Ibid. s. 1, p. 337. 

ffenceforth I cdU you not servants, for the serva/nt hnoweth 
not what his Lord doth ; bvi I have called you friends, for aU 
things I home hea/rd from the Father I have made hnovm 
to you, 

I never thought of this text before, but it seems 
to me a stronger passage in favour of Psilanthropism, 
or modem Socinianism, — a doctrine which of all 
heresies I deem the most fundamental and the worst 
(the impurities of madmen out of the question), — 
than I have ever seen, and far stronger than that 
concerning the day of judgment, which in its apparent 
sense is clearly high Arianism, or teaching the super- 
angelical, yet infra-divine, nature of Christ. We must 
interpret it Kar ivaXoylav Trlareois, not as aU things 
absolutely, but as all things concerning your interests, 
all things that it behoves you to know. Else it would 


contradict Christ's words, None knoweth the Father 
but the Son, that is, truly and totally. For Christ 
does not promise in this life to give us the same 
degree of knowledge as he himself possessed, but 
only a qiLantum mfficit'ot the kind. This is clear 
by St. John's aU things, which assuredly did not 
include either the discoveries of Newton or of Davy. 
—14 August, 1811. 

Ibid, s. 3, p. 848. 

The Churches have troubled themselves with infinite 
variety of questions, and divided their precious unity, and 
destroyed charity, and instead of contending against the 
devil and all his crafiy methods, they have contended 
against one another, and excommunicated one another, and 
anathematized and danmed one another ; and no man is the 
better after all, but most men are very much the worse ; and 
the Churches are in the world still divided about questions 
that commenced twelve or thirteen ages since, and they are 
like to be so for ever, till Ellas come, &c. 

I remember no passages of the Fathers nearer to 
inspired Scripture than this and similar ones of 
Jeremy Taylor, in which, quitting the acute logician, 
he combines his heart with his head, and utters 
general, and inclusive, and reconciling truths of 
charity and of common sense. All amounts but to 
this : — what is binding on all must be possible to all. 
But conformity of intellectual conclusions is not 
possible. Faith therefore cannot reside totally in the 
understanding. But to do what we believe we ought 
to do is possible to all, therefore binding on all; 
therefore the unum necessarium of Christian £Edth. 
Talk not of bad conscience ; it is like bad sense, that 
is, no sense ; and we all know that we may wilfully 
lie till we involuntarily believe the lie as truth ; but 
causa causa est causa vera causati. 


Ibid. p. 347. 

But if you mean the Catholic Church, then, if you mean 
her, an abstracted separate being from all particulars, you 
pursue a cloud, and fall in love with an idea and a child of 

Here Taylor uses *idea* as opposed to image or 
distinct phantasm; and this is with few exceptions 
his general sense, and even the exceptions are only 
metaphors from the general sense, that is, images so 
faint, indefinite and fluctuating as to be almost no 
images, that is, ideas ; as we say of a very thin body, 
it is a ghost or spirit, the lowest degree of one kind 
being expressed by the opposite kind. 

Ibid, p. 380. 

'Miracles' were, in the beginning of Christianity, a note of 
true believers : Christ told us so. And he also taught us 
that Anti-Christ should be revealed in lying signs and 
wonders, and commanded us, by that token, to take heed of 

An excellent distinction between a note or mark by 
which a thing already proved may be known, and the 
proofs of the thing. Thus the poisonous qualities of 
the nightshade are established by the proper proofs, 
and the marks by which a plant may he known to he 
the nightshade, are the number, position, colour, and 
so on, of its filaments, petals, and the rest. 


The * spirit of prophecy * is also a pretty sure note of the 
true Church, and yet * ♦ ♦ I deny not but there have 
been some prophets in the Church of Borne : Johannes de 
Rupe Scissa, Anselmus, Harsicanus, Bobert Qrosthead, 
Bishop of Lincoln, St Hildegardis, Abbot Joachim, whose 

VOL. L 1^ 


prophecies and pictures prophetical were published by 
Theophrastus Paracelsus, and John Adrasder, and by 
Paschalinus Regiselmus, at Venice, 1589; but (as Ahab 
said concerning Micaiah) these do not prophesy good 
concerning Borne, but evil, &c 

This paragraph is an exquisite specimen of grave 
and dignified irony, telum quod cedere simvlat retor- 
quentis. In contrast with this stands the paragraph 
on note 15 (p. 381), which is a coarse though not un- 
merited sneer, or, as a German would have expressed 
himself, *an of- Jeremy-Taylor-unworthy, though a-not- 


Ibid. p. 381. 

— excepting only some Popes have been remarked by their 
own histories for funest and direful deaths. 

In the adoption of this word * funest* into the 
English language by apocope of the final us, Taylor 
is supported by * honest' and * modest ; ' but then the 
necessity of pronouncing funest should have excluded 
it, the superlative final being an objection to all of 
them, though outweighed in the others. A common 
reader would pronounce it *fiinSst,' and perhaps 
mistake it for ' funniest.' 

Ibid, p. 382. 

— sacraments, which to be seven, is with them an article 
of fskith. 

The fastidious exclusion of this and similar idioms 
in modem writing occasions unnecessary embarrass- 
ment for the writer, both in narration and argumenting, 
and contributes to the monotony of our style. 



The Fathers and Schoolmen differ greatly in the definition 
of a Sacrament 

Had it been in other respects advisable, it would, 
I think, have been theologically convenient, if our 
Reformers had contra-distinguished Baptism and the 
Lord's Supper by the term Mysteries, and allowed 
the name of Sacrament to Ordination, Confirmation, 
and Marriage. 

lUd. B. 3, p. 888. 

And he did so to the Jews * * * tradition was not 
relied upon; it was not trusted with any law of faith or 

This all the later Jews deny, affirming an oral 
communication from Moses to the Seventy, on as lame 
pretences as the Eoman Catholics, and for the same 
vile purposes as reproved by Christ, who, if he had 
believed the story, would not have condemned tradi- 
tions of men generally without exception, and would 
not have proved the immortality of the Patriarchs by 
a text which seems to have had no such primary 
intention, though it may contain the deduction poten- 
tialiter. But Taylor's 1 st and 7th arguments following 
are, the former weak and incorrect, the latter dictum 
et vulgatunif sed non prohatuniy ne dicam improhatum. 
Who doubts that all that is indispensable to the salva- 
tion of each and every one is contained in the New 
Testament? But is it not contained in the first 
chapter of St. John's Gospel ? Is it not contained 
in the 11th of the Acts, and in a score other separable 
portions ? Necessary, indispensable, and the like, are 
multivocal terms. Dogs have survived (and without 
any noticeable injury) the excision of the spleen. 


Dare we conclude from this fact that the spleen is 
not necessary to the continuance of the canine race ? 
What is not indispensable for even the majority of 
individual believers may be necessary for the Church. 
Instead, therefore, of these terms, put * true,' * im- 
portant,' and * constitutive,' that is, appertaining to the 
chain (ad catenam auream) of truths interdependent 
and rendered mutually intelligible, which constitute 
the system of the Christian religion, including not 
alone the faith and morals of individuals, but the 
organismus likewise of the Church, as a body spiritual, 
yet outward and historical ; and this again not as an 
aggregate or sum total, like a corn-sheaf, but a unity. 
Let the question, I say, be thus re-stated, and then 
let the cause come to trial between the Romish and 
the Protestant divines. 

N.6. As a running comment on all these marginal 
notes, let it be understood that I hold the far greater 
part — the only not all of what our great Author 
urges, to apply with irrefutable force against the 
doctrine and practice of the Romish Church, as it in 
. fact exists, and no less against the Familists and istitu 
farincB enthusiastas, I contend only, that he himself, 
in several assertions, lies open to attack from the 
supporters of a scheme of faith, as unlike either the 
Romish or the Fanatical, as Taylor's own ; and which 
scheme, namely, the co-ordinate authority of the 
Word, the Spirit and the Church, I believe to be the 
true Apostolic and Catholic doctrine, and that to this 
scheme his objections do not apply. When I can 
bring myself to believe that from the mere perusal of 
the New Testament a man might have sketched out 
by anticipation the constitution, discipline, creeds, and 
sacramental ritual of the Episcopal Reformed Church 
of England ; or that it is not a true and orthodox 
Church, because this is incredible ; then I may per- 


haps be ioclined to echo Chilh'ngworth. As I cannot 
think that it detracts from a dial that in order to tell 
the time the sun must shine upon it ; so neither does 
it detract from the Scriptures, that though the best 
and holiest they are yet Scripture, and require a pure 
heart and the consequent assistances of God's enlight- 
ening grace in order to understand them to edifi- 
cation. — 1812. 

I still agree with the preceding note, and add that 
Jeremy Taylor should have cited the Arians and 
Socinians on the other side. But the Eomish Papal 
hierarchy cannot for shame say, or only from want of 
shame can pretend to say, what a Catholic would be 
entitled to urge on the triple link of the Scripture, 
the Spirit, and the Church.— 27 April, 1826. 

Ibid, 8. 6, p. 392. 

From this principle, as it is promoted by the Fanatics, they 
derive a wimdering, unsettled, and a dissolute religion, &c. 

The evils of the Fanatic persuasion here so power- 
fully, so exquisitely, stated and enforced by our 
all-eloquent Bishop, supply no proof, or even pre- 
sumption, against the tenet of the Spirit rightly 
expressed. For catholicity is the distinctive mark, 
the conditio sine qua non, of a spiritual teaching ; and 
if men that dream with their eyes open mistake for 
this the very contrary, that is, their own particular 
fancies, or perhaps sensations, who can help it ? 

lUd. s. 7, p. 894. 

They affirm that the Scriptures are full, that they are a 
perfect rule, that they contain all things necessary to 
salvation : and from hence they confuted all heresies. 

Yes, the heretics were so confuted, I grant ; bec&usi^ 


these would not acknowledge any other authority but 
that of the Scriptures, and these too forged or cor- 
rupted by themselves; -but by the Scriptures that 
remained unaltered the early Fathers of the Church 
both demonstrated the omissions and interpolations of 
the heretical canons and the false doctrines of the 
heresy itself. But so far from following the same 
rule to the members of the true Church, they made 
the applicability of this way of proof the criterion of 
a heretic. 

Ibid, p. 394. 

' Which truly they then preached, but afterwards by the 
will of God delivered to us in the Scriptures, which was to 
be the pillar and ground to our faith.' 

Lessing has shown this to be a false and even 
ungrammatical rendering of Irenaeus's words. The 
columen et fundamentum fidei, are the Creed, or 
economy of salvation. 

Ibid. 7, p. 395. Extracts from Clement's StromcUa. 

It would require a volume to show the qualifica- 
tions with which these excerpta must be read. There 
is no one source of error and endless controversy 
more fruitful than this custom of quoting detached 
sentences. I would pledge myself in the course of a 
single morning to bring an equal number of passages 
from the same (Ante-Nicene) Fathers in proof of the 
Roman Catholic theory. One palpable cheat in these 
transcripts is the neglect of appreciating the words, 
* inspired,' a ' Spiritu dicta,' and the like, in the 
Patristic use ; as if the Fathers did not frequently 
apply the same terms to the discourses of the Bishops, 
their contemporaries, and to writings not canonic^. 


It is wonderful how so acute and learned a man as 
Taylor could have read TertuUian, Irenseus and 
Clemens Alexandnnus, and not. have seen that the 
passages are all against him so far as they all make 
the Scriptures suhsidiary only to the Spirit in the 
Church and the Baptismal creed, the Kav(av TrCaT€(i)s, . 
regula Jidei, or aconomia salxUis, 

Ibid. p. 396. 

— that the tradition ecclesiastical, that is, the whole doc- 
trine taught by the Church of God, and preached to all men, 
is in the Scripture. 

It is only by the whole context and purpose of the 
work, and this too interpreted by the known doctrine 
of the age, that the intent of the sentences here 
quoted can be determined, relatively to the point in 
question. But even as they stand here, they do not 
assert that the Traditio Ecclesiastica was grounded 
on, or had been deduced from, the Scriptures ; nor 
that by Scripture Clemens meant principcJly the New 
Testament ; and that the Scriptures contain the Tra- 
dition Ecclesiastical or Catholic Faith the Romish 
di-ines admit and contend. 


Jbid. p. 399. Extract from Origen. 

AS our Saviour imposed silence upon the Sadducees by 
the word of his doctrine, and faithfully convinced that false 
opinion which they thought to be truth ; so also shall the 
followers of Christ do, by the examples of Scripture, by 
which according to sound doctrine every voice of Pharaoh 
ought to be silent. 

Does not this prove too much ; namely, that nothing 
exists in the New, which does not likewise exist in the 
Old Testament? 


One objection to Jeremy Taylor's argument here 
must, I think, strike every reflecting mind : namely, 
that in order to a fair and full view of the sentiments 
of the Fathers of the first four centuries, all they 
declare of the Church, and her powers and preroga- 
tives, ought to have been likewise given. As soon as 
I receive any writing as inspired by the Spirit of 
Truth, of course I must believe it on its own autho- 
rity. But how am I assured that it is an inspired 
work? Now do not these Fathers reply, By the 
Church ? To the Church it belongs to declare what 
books are Holy Scriptures, and to interpret their 
right sense. Is not this the common doctrine among 
the Fathers? And how was the Church to judge ? 
First, by the same spirit surviving in her; and 
secondly, by the accordance of the Book itself vnth 
the canon of faith, that is the Baptismal Creed. And 
what was this ? Traditio Ecclesiastica. As to myself, 
I agree with Taylor against the Romanists, that the 
Bible is for us the only rule of faith ; but I do not 
adopt his mode of proving it. In the earliest period 
of Christianity the Scriptures of the New Testament 
and the Ecclesiastical Tradition were reciprocally tests 
of each other : but for the Christians of the second 
century the Scriptures were tried by the Ecclesiastical 
Tradition, while for us the order is reversed, and we 
must try the Ecclesiastical Tradition by the Scrk)- 
tures. Therefore I do not expect to find the proofs 
of the supremacy of Scripture in the early Fathers, 
nor do we need their authority. Our proofs are 
stronger without it. 

Ibid, p. 403. 

Which words I the rather remark, because this article of 
the consubstantiality of Christ with the Father is brought as 


an instance (by the Romanists) of the necessity of tradition, 
to make up the insufficiency of Scripture. 

How shall I make this rhyme to Taylor's owtt 
assertion, in the last paragraph of sect. xix. of his 
Episcopacy Asserted, * in which he clearly refers to 
this very question as relying on tradition for its clear- 
ness ? Jeremy Taylor was a true Father of the 
Church, and would furnish as fine a subject for a 
concordantia discordantiarum as St. Austin himself. 
For the exoteric and esoteric he was a very Pytha- 

Ibid. p. 406. 

— ^for one or two of them say, Theophilus spake against 
Origen, for broaching fopperies of his own, and particularly, 
that Christ's flesh was consubstantial with the Godhead. 

Origen doubtless meant the caro noumenon, and 
was quite right. But never was a great man so mis- 
understood as Origen. 

/&u2. p.408n. 

Sed et alia, qwx absque auctoritate et testimoniis Scriptv/ra/rvm, 
quasi traditione Apostolica, sponte reperiwU atque coTUmgv/iU^ 
perctUit gladius Dei, 

* Those things which they make and find, as it were, by 
Apostolical tradition, without the authority and testimonies 
of Scripture, the word of God smites.* 

Is it clear that Scripturarum depends on attctori- 

* " This also rests upon the practice apostolical and traditive interpre- 
tation of holy Church, and yet cannot be denied that so it ought to be, 
by any man that would not have his Christendom suspected. To these 
I add the communion of women, the distinction of books apocryphal 
from canonical, that such books were written by such Evangelists and 
Apostles, the whole tradition of Scripture itself, the Apostles' Creed, &c. 
• * * These and divers others of gp^ater consequence, (which I dare not 
specify for fear of being misunderstood,) rely but upon equal faith with 
this of Episcopacy," See.— Ed, 


tateF It may well meaix they who, without the 
authority of the Church, or Scriptural testimony, pre- 
tend to an Apostolical Tradition. 

Ibid. p. 411. 

But lastly, if in the plain words of Scripture he contained 
all that is simply necessary to all, then it is clear, by Bellar- 
mine's confession, that St. Austin affirmed that the plain 
places of Scripture are sufficient to all laics and all idiots, or 
private persons, and then it is very ill done to keep them 
from the knowledge and use of the Scriptures, which contam 
all their duty both of faith and good life ; so it is very unne- 
cessary to trouble them with anything else, there being in 
the world no such treasure and repository of faith and 
manners, and that so plain, that it was intended for all men, 
and for all such men is sufficient. '* Read the Holy Scrip- 
tures wherein you shall find some things to be holden, and 
some to be avoided." 

And yet in the preface to his Apology for authorised 
and set forms of Liturgy, * Taylor regrets that the 
Church of England was not able to confine the laity 
to such selections of Holy Writ as are in her Liturgy. 
But Laud was then alive : and Taylor partook of his 
trepidatiuncuLcB towards the Church of Eome. 

Ibid. p. 412. 

And aU these are nothing else, but a full subscription to, 
and an excellent commentary upon, those words of St. Paul, 
Let no mem pretend to be wise aibove what is toriUen, 

Had St, Paul anything beyond the Law and the 
Prophets in his mind ? 

• S. xxvl. 


Ibid. p. 416. 

St. Paul's way of teaching us to expound Scripture is, that 
he that prophesies should do it kwt' ii,ya\oyiciy trior €ws, ac- 
cording to the analogy of faith. 

Yet in his Liberty of Prophesying * Taylor turns 
this way into mere ridicule. I love thee, Jeremy ! but 
an arrant theological barrister that thou wast, though 
thy only fees were thy desires of doing good in qiies- 
tionibiis singuLis. 

Ibid. s. 3, p. 419. 

Only, hecause we are sure there was some false dealing in 
this matter, and we know there might be much more than 
we have discovered, we have no reason to rely upon any 
tradition for any part of our faith, any more than we could 
do upon Scripture, if one hook or chapter of it should he 
detected to he imposture. 


What says Jeremy Taylor then to the story of the 
woman taken in adultery {John c. viii. 3 — 11.) which 
Chrysostom disdains to comment on? If true, how 
could it be omitted in so many, and these the most 
authentic, copies ? And if this for fear of scandal, 
why not others ? And who does not know that fiedse- 
hood may be effected as well by omissions as by inter- 
polations ? But if false, — then — ^but Taylor draws 
the consequence himself. 

Ibid. p. 427. 

So that the tradition concerning the Scriptures being 
extrinsical to Scripture is also extrinsical to the question : 
this tradition cannot he an ohjection against the sufficiency 
of Scripture to salvation, but must go before this question. 
For no man inquires whether the Scriptures contain all 

• S. iv. 4.— iSW. 


things necessary to salvation, unless he believe that there 
are Scriptures, that these are they, and that they are the 
word of God. All this comes to lis by tradition, that is, by 
universal undeniable testimony. 

Very just, and yet this idle argument is the favorite, 
both shield and sword, of the Romanists : as if I 
should pretend to learn the Roman history from 
tradition, because by tradition I know such histories 
to have heen written hy Livy, Sallust, and Tacitus ! 

Ibid. p. 435. 

The more natural consequence is that their proposition is 
either mistaken or uncertain, or not an article of faitb, 
(which is rather to be hoped, lest we condemn all the Greek 
Churches as infidels or perverse heretics), or else that it can 
be derived from Scripture, which last is indeed the most 
probable, and pursuant to the doctrine of those wiser Latins 
who examined things by reason and not by prejudice. 

It is remarkable that both Stillingfleet and Taylor 
favoured the Greek opinion. But Bull's Defensio 
Fidei Niccena was not yet published. It is to me 
evident . that if the Holy Ghost does not proceed 
through and from the Son as well as from the Father, 
then the Son is not the adequate substantial idea of 
the Father. But according to St. Paul, he is — ergo, 
&c. N.B. These * ergos, dc' in legitimate syllogisms, 
where the major and minor have been conceded, are 
binding on all human beings, with the single anomaly 
of the Quakers. For with them nothing is more 
common than to admit both major and minora and, 
when you add the inevitable consequence, to say, 
* Nay ! I do not think so, Friend ! Thou art worldly 
wise, Friend ! ' For example : major, it is agreed on 
both sides that we ought not to withhold from a man 
what he has a just right to ; minor, property in land 


being the creature of law, a just right in respect of 
landed property is determined by the law of the land : 
' agreed, such is the fact :* ergo : the clergyman has 
a just right to the tithe. * Nay, nay ; this is vanity, 
and tithes an abomination of Judaism ! * 

Ibid, 8. 5, p. 492. 

And since that villain of a man, Pope Hildebrand, as 
Cardinal Beno I'elates in his Life, could, by sbaking of his 
sleeye make sparks of fire fly from it. 

If this was fact, was it an idiosyncrasy, as I have 
known those who by combing their hair can elicit 
sparks, with a crackling as from a cat's back rubbed ? 
It is very possible that the sleeve might be silk, 
tightened either on a very hairy arm, or else on 
woollen, and by shaking it might be meant stripping 
the silk suddenly off, which would doubtless produce 
flashes and sparks. 

Vol. XL 8. 10, p. 1. 

As a general remark, suggested indeed by this 
section, but applicable to very many parts of Taylor's 
controversial writings both against the anti-Prelatic 
and the Romish divines, especially to those in which 
our incomparable Church-aspist attempts, not always 
successfully, to demonstrate the difference between 
the dogmas and discipline of the ancient Church, and 
those which the Romish doctors vindicate by them, — 
I would say, once for all, that it was the fashion of 
the Arminian court divines of Taylor's age, that is, 
of the High Church party, headed by Archbishop 
Laud, to extol, and (in my humble judgment) egre- 
giously to overrate, the example and authority of the 


first four, nay, of the first six centuries ; and at all 
events to take for granted the Evangelical and 
Apostolical character of the Church to the death of 
Athanasius. Now so far am I from conceding this, 
that before the first Council of NicsBa, I believe 
myself to find the seeds and seedlings of all the 
worst corruptions of the Latin Church of the thir- 
teenth century, and not a few of these even before 
the close of the second. One pernicious error of the 
primitive Church was the conversion of the ethical 
ideas, indispensable to the science of morals and 
religion, into fixed practical laws and rules for all 
Christians, in all stages of spiritual growth, and under 
all circumstances : and with this the degradation of 
free and individual acts into corporate Church obliga- 
tions. Another not less pernicious was the gradual 
concentration of the Church into a priesthood, and 
the consequent rendering of the reciprocal functions 
of love and redemption and counsel between Christian 
and Christian exclusively official, and between dis- 
parates, namely, the priest and the layman. 

Ibid. B. II. 8. 2, p. 58. 

Often have I welcomed, and often have I wrestled 
with, the thought of writing an essay on the day of 
judgment. Are the passages in St. Peter*s Epistle 
respecting the circumstances of the last day and the 
final conflagration, and even St. Paul's, to be regarded 
as apocalyptic and a part of the revelation by Christ, 
or are they, like the dogma of a personal Satan, 
accommodations of tlie current popular creed which 
they continued to believe ? 


Ibid. s. 3, p. 105. 

And therefore St. Paul left an excellent precept to the 
Church to avoid profcmaa vocvm novHatea, 'the prophane 
newness of words;' that is, it is fit that the mysteries re- 
vealed in Scripture should be preached and taught in the 
words of the Scripture, and with that simplicity, openness, 
easiness, and candor, and not with new and unhallowed 
words, such as that of Transubstantiation. 

Are not then Trinity, Tri-unity, hypostasis , peri- 
choresis, diphysis, and others, excluded ? Yet Water- 
land very ingeniously, nay more, very honestly and 
sensibly, shows the necessity of these terms per acci- 
dens. The profanum fell back on the heretics who 
had occasioned the necessity. 

Ibid. p. 106. 

* The oblation of a cake was a figure of the Eucharistical 
bread which the Lord commanded to do in remembrance of 
his passion.' These are Justin's words in that place. 

Justin Martyr could have meant no more, and the 

Greek construction means no more, than that the 

cake we offer is the representative, substitute, and 

facsimile of the bread which Christ broke and 


I find no necessary absurdity in Transubstantiation. 
For substance is but a notion thought on to the 
aggregate of accidents — hinzugedacht — conceived, not 
perceived, and conceived always in universals, never 
in concreto. Therefore, X, Y, Z, being unknown 
quantities, Y may be as well annexed by the choice 
of the mind as the imagined substratum as X. For 
we cannot distinguish substance from substance any 
more than X from X. The substrate or causa 
invisibilis may be the noum£non or actuality, das 


Ding in sick, of Christ's humanity, as well as the 
Ding in sick of which the sensatiou, bread, is the 
appearance. But then, on the other hand, there is 
not a word of sense possible to prove that it is really 
so ; and from the not impossible to the real is a 
strange tdtra-Rhodmn leap. And it is opposite both 
to the simplicity of Evangelical meaning, and anoma- 
lous from the interpretation of all analogous phrases 
which all men expound as figures, — I am the gate, 
I am the way, I am the vine, and the like, — and to 
Christ's own declarations that his words were to be 
understood spiritually, that is, figuratively. 

Ibid. 8. 6, p. 164. 

However, if you will not commit downright idolatiy, as 
some of their saints teach you, then you must be careM to 
observe these plain distinctions; and first be sure to re* 
member that when you worship an image, you do it not 
materially but formally ; not as it is of such a substance, but 
as it is a sign ; next take care that you observe what sort of 
image it is, and then proportion your right kind to it, that 
you do not give IcUria to that where hyperchdia is only due ; 
and be careful that if didia only be due, that your worship 
be not hyperdiUical, &c. 

A masterly specimen of grave dignified irony. 
Indeed, Jeremy Taylor's Works would be of more 
service to an English barrister than those of De- 
mosthenes, uSschines, and Cicero taken together. 

Ibid. s. 7, p. 168. 

A man cannot well imderstand an essence, and hath no 
idea of it in his mind, much less can a painter's pencil do it 

Noticeable, that this is the only instance I have 
met in any English classic before the Bevolutiou of 


the word 'idea* used as synoDjmous with a tnental 
image. Taylor himself has repeatedly placed the 
two in opposition; and even here I doubt whether 
he has done otherwise. I rather think he meant by 
the word *idea* a notion under an indefinite and 
confused form, such as Kant calls a schema or vague 
outline, an imperfect embryo of a concrete, to the 
individuation of which the mind gives no conscious 
attention ; just as when I say — * any thing,* I may 
imagine a poker or a plate ; but I pay no attention 
to its being this rather than that; and the very 
image itself is so wandering and unstable that at this 
moment it may be a dim shadow of the one, and in 
the next of some other thing. In this sense, idea is 
opposed to image in degree instead of kind ; yet still 
contra-distinguished, as is evident by the sequel, 
• much less can a painter's pencil do it :* for were it 
an image, individui et concreti, then the painters 
pencil could do it as well as his fancy, or better. 


Of all Taylor's works, the Discourse of Confirma- 
tion seems to me the least judicious ; and yet that is 
not the right word either. I mean, however, that one 
is puzzled to know for what class of readers or auditors 
it was intended. He announces his subject as one of 
such lofty claims ; he begins with positions taken on 
such high ground, no less than the superior dignity 
and spiritual importance of Confirmation above Bap- 
tism itself — whether considered as a sacramental rite 
and mystery distinct from Baptism, or as its com- 
pletory and crowning part (the finis coronans opus) — 
that we are eager to hear the proof. But proofs differ 
in their value according to our previous valuation of 

VOL. h X 


authorities. What would pass for a very sufficient 
proof, because grounded on a reverend authority, with 
a Romanist, would be a mere fiEmcy-medal and of no 
currency with a Bible Protestant. And yet for Pro- 
testants, and those too laymen (for we can hardly 
suppose that Taylor thought his Episcopal brethren in 
need of it), must this Discourse have been intended ; 
and in this point of view, surely never did so wise a 
man adopt means so unsuitable to his end, or frame 
a discourse so inappropriate to his audience. The 
authorities of the Fathers are, indeed, as strong and 
decisive in favour of the Bishop's position as the 
warmest advocate of Confirmation could wish; but 
this very circumstance was calculated to create a pre- 
judice against the doctrine in the mind of a zealous 
Protestant, from the contrast in which the unequivocal 
and explicit declarations of the Fathers stand with the 
remote, arbitrary, and fine-drawn inferences from the 
few passages of the New Testament which can be 
forced into an implied sanction of a rite no where 
mentioned, and as a distinct and separate ministration, 
utterly, as I conceive, unknown in the Apostolic age. 
How much more rational and convincing (as to me it 
seems) would it have been to have shown, that when 
from various causes the practice of Infant Baptism 
became general in the Church, Confirmation, or the 
acknowledgment in propria persona of the obligations 
that had been incurred by proxy was introduced; 
and needed no other justification than its own evident 
necessity, as substantiating the preceding form as to 
the intended effects of Baptism on the believer 
himself, and then to have shown the great uses and 
spiritual benefits of the institution. But this would 
not do. Such was the spirit of the age that nothing 
less than the assertion of a divine origin, — of a formal 
and positive institution by Christ himself, or by the 


Apostles in their Apostolic capacity as legislators for 
the universal Church in all ages, could serve ; and 
accordingly Bishops, liturgies, tithes, monarchy, and 
what not, were, de jure divino, with celestial patents, 
wrapped up in the womb of this or that text of Scrip- 
ture, to be exforcipated by the logico-obstetric skill of 
High Church doctors and ultra-loyal court chaplains. 



Ibid. p. 217. 

This very poor church. 

With the exception of Spain, the Church establish- 
ment in Ireland is now, I conceive, the richest in 
Europe ; though by the most iniquitous measure of 
the Irish Parliament, most iniquitously permitted to 
acquire the force of law at the Union, the Irish 
Church was robbed of the tithes from all pasture 
lands. What occasioned so great a change in its 
favour since the time of Charles II.? 1810. 

IHd, p. 218. 

And amidst these and very many more inconveniences it 
was greatly necessary that God should send us such a king. 

Such a king ! O sorrow and shame ! Why, why, 
O Genius ! didst thou suffer thy darling son to crush 
the fairest flower of thy garland beneath a mitre of 
Charles's putting on ! 

Ibid. p. 219. 

For besides that the great usefulness of this ministry will 
greatly endear the Episcopal order, to which (that I may use 


St Hierom's words) ''if there be not attributed a more than 
common power and authority, there will be as many schisms 
as priests/' &c 

On this ground the Romish divines justify the 
Papacy. The fact of the Scottish Church is the 
sufficient answer to hoth. Episcopacy needs not rash 
assertions for its support 

Ibid. p. 220. 

For it i<9 a sure rule in our religion, and is of an eternal 
truth, that **thej who keep not the unity of the church, 
have not the Spirit of Qod." 

Contrast with this our XlXth and XXth Articles 
on the Church. The Irish Eoman Catholic Bishops, 
methinks, must have read this with delight. What 
an over-hasty simpleton that James II. was ! Had 
he waited and caressed the Bishops, they would have 
taken the work off his hands. 

Ibid, p. 229. Introduction. 

It has been my conviction that in respect of the 
theory of the Faith, (though God be praised ! not in 
the practical result,) the Papal and the Protestant 
communions are equidistant from the true idea of the 
Gospel Institute, though erring from opposite direc- 
tions. The Romanists sacrifice the Scripture to the 
Church, virtually annulling the former : the Protes- 
tants reversed this practically, and even in theory, 
(see the above-mentioned Articles,) annulling the 
latter. The consequence has been, as might have 
been predicted, the extinction of the Spirit (the indif- 
ference or mesothesis) in hoth considered as bodies : 
for I doubt not that numerous individuals in both 


CEurcbes live in communion with the Spirit. Towards 
the close of the reign of our first James, and during 
the period from the accession of Charles I. to the 
restoration of his profligate son, there arose a party 
of divines, Arminians (and many of them Latitudi- 
narians) in their Creed, but devotees of the throne 
and the altar, soaring High Churchmen and ultra 
royalists. Much as I dislike their scheme of doctrine 
and detest their principles of government both in 
Church and State, I cannot but allow that they formed 
a galaxy of learning and talent, and that among them 
the Church of England finds her stars of the first 
magnitude. Instead of regarding the Eeformation 
established under Edward VI. as imperfect, they 
accused the Eeformers, some of them openly, but all 
in their private opinions, of having gone too far ; and 
while they were willing to keep down (and if they 
could not reduce him to a primacy of honor to keep 
out) the Pope, and to prune away the innovations in 
doctrine brought in under the Papal domination, they 
were zealous to restore the hierarchy, and to substi- 
tute the authority of the Fathers, Canonists, and 
Councils of the first six or seven centuries, and the 
least Papistic of the later Doctors and Schoolmen, 
for the names of Luther, Melancthon, Bucer, Calvin 
and the systematic theologians who rejected all testi- 
mony but that of their Bible. As far as the prin- 
ciple, on which Archbishop Laud and his followers 
acted, went to re-actuate the idea of the Church, as 
a co-ordinate and living Power by right of Christ's 
institution and express promise, I go along with 
them ; but I soon discover that by the Church they 
meant the Clergy, the hierarchy exclusively, and then 
I fly off from liem in a tangent. For it is this very 
interpretation of the Church that, according to my 
conviction, constituted the first and fundamental 


apostasy; and I bold it for one of the greatest mis- 
takes of our polemic divines in their controversies 
with the Romanists, that they trace all the corruptions 
of the Gospel faith to the Papacy. Meantime can 
we be surprised that our forefathers under the Stuarts 
were alarmed, and imagined that the Bishops and 
court preachers were marching in quick time with 
their faces towards Borne, when, to take one instance 
of a thousand, a great and famous divine, like Bishop 
Taylor, asserts the inferiority, in rank and efficacy, of 
Baptism to Confirmation, and grounds this assertion 
so strange to all Scriptural Protestants, on a text of 
Cabasilas — a saying of Rupertus — a phrase of St. 
Denis — and a sentence of St. Bernard in a Life of 
St. Malachias! — for no Benedictine can be more 
liberal in his attribution of saintship than Jeremy 
Taylor, or more reverently observant of the beatifica- 
tions and canonizations of the Old Lady of the scarlet 
petticoat.^P.S. If the reader need other illustra- 
tions, I refer him to Bishop Hackett's Sermons on 
the Advent and Nativity, which might almost pass for 
the orations of a Franciscan brother, whose reading 
had been confined to the Aurea Legenda. It would 
be uncandid not to add that this indiscreet traffickery 
with Romish wares was in part owing to the immense 
reading of these divines. 

Ihid, 8. 1, p. 247. Acts viiL 14 — 17. 

This is an argument indeed, and one that of itself 
would suffice to decide the question, if only it could 
be proved, or even made probable, that by the Holy 
Ghost in this place was meant that receiving of the 
Spirit to which Confirmation is by our Church de- 
clared to be the means and vehicle. But this I 
suspect cannot be done. The whole passage to which 


sundiy chapters in St. Paul's Epistles seem to supply 
the comment, inclines and almost compels me to 
understand by the Holy Ghost in this narrative the 
miraculous gifts, ras bvvifxciSj collectively. And in 
no other sense can I understand the sentence the 
Holy Ghost was not yet fallen upon any of them. 
But the subject is beset with difficulties from the 
paucity of particular instances recorded by the inspired 
historian, and from the multitude and character of 
these instances found in the Fathers and Ecclesiastical 

Ibid, s. 2, p. 254. 

Still they are all bvvifxcis, exhibitable pov^ers, 
faculties. Were it otherwise, what strange and fearful 
consequences would follow from the assertion, the 
Holy Spirit was not yet fallen upon any of them. 
That we misunderstand the gift of tongues, and that 
it did not mean the power of speaking foreign lan- 
guages unlearnt, I am strongly persuaded. Yea, but 
this is not the question. If my heart bears me 
witness that I love my brother, that I love my mer- 
ciful Saviour, and call Jesus Lord and the Anointed 
of God with joy of heart, I am encouraged by Scrip- 
ture to infer that the Spirit abideth in me ; besides 
that I know that of myself, and estranged from the 
Holy Spirit, I cannot even think a thought acceptable 
before God. But how will this help me to believe 
that I received this Spirit through the Bishop's hands 
laid on my head at Confirmation : when perhaps I 
am distinctly conscious, that I loved my Saviour, 
freely forgave, nay, tenderly yearned for the weal of, 
them that hated me before mv Confirmation, — when, 
indeed, I must have been the most uncharitable 
of men if I did not admit instances of the most 


exemplary faith, charity, and devotion in Christians 
who do not practise the imposition of hands in their 
Churches. What ! did those Christians, of whom St. 
Ldke speaks, not love their brethren ? 

In fine. 

I have had too frequent experience of professional 
divines, and how they identify themselves with the 
theological scheme to which they have been articled, 
and I understand too well the nature and the power, 
the efiTect and the consequences, of a wilful fcuth,— * 
where the sensation of positiveness is substituted for 
the sense of certainty, and the stubborn clutch for 
quiet insight, — to wonder at any degree of hardihood 
in matters of belief. Therefore the instant and 
deep-toned affirmative to the question, * And do you 
actually believe the presence of the material water in 
the baptising of infants or adults is essential to their 
salvation, so indispensably so that the omission of the 
water in the Baptism of an infant who should die the 
day after would exclude that infant from the kingdom 
of heaven, and whatever else is implied in the loss 
of salvation ? ' — I should not be surprised, I say, to 
hear this question answered with an emphatic, * Yes, 
Sir! I do actually believe this, for thus I find it 
written, and herein begins my right to the name of a 
Christian, that I have exchanged my reason for the 
Holy Scriptures : I acknowledge no reason but the 
Bible.' But as this intrepid respondent, though he 
may dispense with reason, cannot quite so easily free 
himself from the obligations of common sense and 
the canons of logic, — both of which demand consis- 
tency, and like consequences from like premisses in 
rebus ejusdem generis, in subjects of the same class, 
— I do find myself tempted to wonder, some small 
deal, at the unscrupulous substitution of a few drops 


of water sprinkled on the face for the Baptism, that 
is, immersion or dipping of the whole person, even 
if the rivers or running waters had been thought non- 
essential. And yet where every word in any and in 
all the four narratives is so placed under the logical 
press as it is in this Discourse by Jeremy Taylor, and 
each and every incident pronounced exemplary, and 
for the purpose of being imitated, I should hold even 
this hazardous. But I must wonder a very great 
deal, and in downright earnest, at the contemptuous 
language which the satae men employ in their con- 
troversies with the Romish Church, respecting the 
corporal presence in the consecrated bread and wine, 
and the efficacy of extreme unction. For my own 
part, the assertion that what is phenomenally bread 
and wine is substantially the Body and Blood of 
Christ, does not shock my common sense more than 
that a few drops of water sprinkled on the face should 
produce a momentous change, even a regeneration, 
in the soul ; and does not outrage my moral feelings 
half as much. 

P.S. There is one error of very ill consequence to 
the reputation of the Christian community, which 
Taylor shares with the Bomish divines, namely, the 
quoting of opinions, and even of rhetorical flights, 
from the writings of this and that individual, with 
* Saint' prefixed to his name, as expressing the faith 
of the Church during the first five or six centuries. 
Whereas it would not, perhaps, be very difficult to 
convince an unprejudiced man and a sincere Christian 
of the impossibility that even the decrees of the 
General Councils should represent the Catholic faith, 
that is, the belief essential to, or necessarily con- 
sequent on, the faith in Christ common to all the 



I KNOW of no book, the Bible excepted, as above 
all comparison, which I, according to my judgment 
and experience, could so safely recommend as teaching 
and enforcing the whole saving truth according to 
the mind that was in Christ Jesus, as the Pilgrim's 
Progress. It is, in my conviction, incomparably 
the best Summa Theologia Evangelica ever pro* 
duced by a writer not miraculously inspired. — 
June 14, 1830. 

It disappointed, nay surprised me, to find Robert 
Southey express himself so coldly respecting the 
style and diction of the Pilgrim s Progress. I can 
find nothing homely in it but a few phrases and 
single words. The conversation between Faithful 
and Talkative* is a model of unaffected dignity and 
rhythmical flow. 


P. 14. 

" We intended not," says Baxter, " to dig down the banks, 
or pull up the hedge, and lay all waste and common, when 
we desired the Prelates' tyranny might cease.'' No ; for the 
intention had been imder the pretext of abating one tyranny 
to establish a far severer and more galling in its stead : in 
doing this the banks had been thrown down, and the hedge 
destroyed ; and while the bestial herd who broke in rejoiced 

* P. 98, &C., of the edition by Morray and Mi^or, Isao.—Ed, 


in thd liavoc, Baxter, and other Buch erring thougli good 
men, stood marvelling at the mischief, which never could 
have been effected, if they had not mainly assisted in it. 

But the question is, would these * erring good * 
men have been either willing or able to assist in this 
work, if the more erring Lauds and Sbeldons had 
not run riot in the opposite direction ? And as for 
the * bestial herd,* — compare the whole body of 
Parliamentarians, all the fanatical sects included, 
with the royal and prelatical party in the reign of 
Charles II. These were, indeed, a bestial herd. See 
Baxter's unwilling and Burnet's honest description 
of the moral discipline throughout the realm under 

Ibid, p. 15. 

They passed with equal facility from strict Puritanism to 
the utmost license of practical and theoretical impiety, as 
Antinomians or as Atheists, and from extreme profligacy to 
extreme superstition in any of its forms. 

* They I ' How many ? and of these how many that 
would not have been in Bedlam, or fit for it, under 
some other form? A madman falls into love or 
religion, and then, forsooth! it is love or religion 
that drove him mad. 

IMd, p. 21. 

In an evil hour were the doctrines of the Gospel sophisti* 
cated with questions which should have been left in the 
Schools for those who are unwise enough to employ themselves 
in excogitations of useless subtlety. 

But what, at any rate, had Bunyan to do with the 
Schools? His perplexities clearly rose out of the 

33*2 THE pii.orim:*s pboobess. 

operations of his own active but unarmed mind on 
the words of the Apostle. If anything is to be 
arraigned, it must be the Bible in English, the 
reading of which is imposed (and, in my judgment, 
well and wisely imposed) as a duty on all who can 
read. Though Protestants, we are not ignorant of 
the occasional and partial evils of promiscuous Bible 
reading ; but we see them vanish when we place 
them beside the good. 

Ibid. p. 24. 

False notions of that corruption of our nature which it is 
almost as perilous to exaggerate as to dissemble. 

I would have said * which it is almost as perilous 
to misunderstand as to deny.* 

Ibid. p. 41, &c. 

But the wickedness of the tinker has been greatly over^ 
charged ; and it is taking the language of self-accusation too 
literally, to pronoimce of John Bunyan that he was at any 
time depraved. The worst of what he was in his worst days 
is to be expressed in a single word * * * he had been 
a blackguard, &c. 

All this narrative, with the reflections on the 
facts, is admirable and worthy of Kobert Southey: 
full of good sense and kind feeling — the wisdom 
of love. 

Ibid. p. 61. 

But the Sectaries had kept their countrymen from it 
(the Common Prayer Book), while they had the power, and 
Bimyan himself in his sphere laboured to dissuade them 
from it. 

Surely the fault lay in the want, or in the feeble 


and inconsistent manner, of determining and sup- 
porting the proper powers of the Church. In fact, 
the Prelates and leading divines of the Church were 
not only at variance with each other but each with 
himself. One party, the more faithful and less 
modified disciples of the first Eeformers, were afraid 
of bringing anything into even a semblance of a 
co-ordination with the Scriptures; and, with the 
terriculum of Popery ever before their eyes, timidly 
and sparingly allowed to the Church any even sub- 
ordinate power beyond that of interpreting the 
Scriptures ; that is, of finding the ordinances of the 
Church implicitly contained in the ordinances of the 
inspired writers. But as they did not assume infal- 
libility in their interpretations, it amounted to nothing 
for the consciences of such men as Bunyan and a 
thousand others. The opposite party. Laud, Taylor, 
and the rest, with a sufficient dislike of the Pope 
(that is, at Eome) and of the grosser theological cor- 
ruptions of the Komish Church, yet in their hearts 
as much averse to the sentiments and proceedings of 
Luther, Calvin, John Knox, Zuinglius, and their 
fellows, and proudly conscious of their superior 
learning, sought to maintain their ordinances by 
appeals to the Fathers, to the recorded traditions and 
doctrine of the Catholic priesthood during the first 
five or six centuries, and contended for so much that 
virtually the Scriptures were subordinated to the 
Church, which yet they did not dare distinctly to say 
out. The result was that the Anti-Prelatists answered 
them in the gross by setting at nought their founda- 
tion, that is, the worth, authority, and value of the 
Fathers. So much for their variance with each other. 
But each vindicator of our established Liturgy and 
Discipline was divided in himself; he minced this 
out of fear of being charged with Popery, and thai 

334 THX pilgrim's FB0GBES8. 

he dared not affirm for fear of being charged with 
disloyalty to the King as the head of the Church. 
The distinction between the Church of which the 
king is the rightful head, and the Church which hath 
no head but Christ, never occurred either to them 
or to their antagonists, and as little did they succeed 
in appropriating to Scripture what belonged to Scrip- 
ture, and to the Church what belonged to the Church. 
All things in which the temporal is concerned may 
be reduced to a pentad, namely prothesis, thesis, 
antithesis, mesothesis and synthesis. So here — 

The Word=Chri8t 
Thesis. ^ Mesothesis. AntithesiB. 

The Scripture. * The Spirit. The Church. 

The Preacher. * 

Ibid. p. 63. 

' But there are two ways of obeying,' he observed ; ' the 
one to do that which I in my conscience do believe that I 
am bound to do, actively ; and where I cannot obey actively, 
there I am willing to lie down, and to suffer what they shall 
do unto me.' 

Genuine Christianity worthy of John and Paul ! 

Ibid, p. 65. 

I am not conscious of any warping power that 
could have acted for so very long a period ; but from 
sixteen to now, sixty years of age, I have retained 
the very same convictions respecting the Stuarts and 
their adherents. Even to Lord Clarendon I never 
could quite reconcile myself. 

* See anU.—Ed, 

THE pilgrim's pbogbess. 885 

How often the pen becomes the tongue of a sys- 
tematic dream, — a somuiloquist ! The sunshine, 
that is, the comparative power, the distinct contra- 
distinguishing judgment of realities as other than 
mere thoughts, is suspended. During this state of 
continuous, not single-mindedness, but one-side- 
mindedness, writing is manual somnambulism ; the 
somnial magic superinduced on, without suspending, 
the active powers of the mind. 

Ibid, p. 79. 

'f They that will have heayen, they must run for it, be- 
cause the devil, the law, sin, death and hell, follow them. 
There is never a poor soul that is going to heaven, but the 
devil, the law, sin, death and hell make after that soul. 
The devil, your adversary, as a roaaing Hon, goeth about seeking 
whom he may devowr. And I will assure you the devil is 
nimble, he can run apace; he is light of foot, he hath 
overtaken many ; he hath turned up their heels, and hath 
given them an everlasting fall. Also the law t that can 
shoot a great way : have a care thou keep out of the reach 
of those great guns the Ten Commandments 1 Hell also hath 
a wide mouthy &c." 

It is the fashion of the day to call every man, who 
in bis writings or discourses gives a prominence to 
the doctrines on which, beyond all others, the first 
Beformers separated from the Eomish communion, a 
Calvinist. Bunyan may have been one, but I have 
met with nothing in his writings (except his Anti- 
peedobaptism, to which too he assigns no saving 
importance) that is not much more characteristically 
Lutheran ; for instance, this passage is the very echo 
of the chapter on the Law and Gospel, in Luther's 
Table Talk. 

It would be interesting, and I doubt not, instruc- 


live, to know the distinction in Banyan *s mind 
between the devil and hell. 

Ibid, p. 97. 

Bunyan concludes with something like a promise of a 
third part. There appeared one after his death, and it has 
had the fortune to be included in many editions of the 
original work. 

It is remarkable that South ey should not have 
seen, or having seen, have forgotten to notice, that 
this third part is evidently written by some Romish 
priest or missionary in disguise. 

The early part of his life was an open course of wickedness. 

Southey, in the Life prefixed to his edition of the 
Pilgrim's Progress, has, in a manner worthy of his 
head and heart, reduced this oft repeated charge to 
its proper value. Bunyan was never, in our received 
sense of the word, wicked. He was chaste, sober, 
honest ; but he was a bitter blackguard ; that is, 
damned his own and his neighbour's eyes on slight 
or no occasion, and was fond of a row. lu this our 
excellent Laureate has performed an important 
service to morality. For the transmutation of actual 
reprobates into saints is doubtless possible ; but like 
the many recorded facts of corporeal alchemy, it is 
not supported by modem experiments. 

• Prefixed to an edition of the Pilgrim's Progress, by R. Edwards, 
1820.— jsa. 

THE pilgrim's PROGRESS. 337 

Part I. p. 11. 
As I walked through the wilderness of this world. 

That in the Apocalypse the wilderness is the symbol 
of the world, or rather of the worldly life, Bunyan 
discovered by the instinct of a similar genius. The 
whole Jewish history, indeed, in all its details is so 
admirably adapted to, and suggestive of, symbolical 
use, as to justify the belief that the spiritual appli- 
cation, the interior and permanent sense, was in the 
original intention of the inspiring Spirit, though it 
might not have been present, as an object of distinct 
consciousness, to the inspired writers. 


— where was a den. 

The jail. Mr. Bunyan wrote this precious book in Bedford 
jail, where he was confined on account of his religion. The 
following anecdote is related of him. A Quaker came to the 
jail, and thus addressed him: * Friend Bunyan, the Lord 
sent me to seek for thee, and I have been through several 
counties in search of thee, and now I am glad I have found 
thee.* To which Mr. Bunyan repUed, ' Friend, thou dost 
not speak the truth in saying the Lord sent thee to seek me ; 
for the Lord well knows that I have been in this jail for 
some years; and if he had sent thee, he would have sent 
thee here directly.' — Note in Edwa/rds. 

This is a valuable anecdote, for it proves, what 
might have been concluded a j?non, that Bunyan was 
a man of too much genius to be a fanatic. No two 
qualities are more contrary than genius and fanaticism. 
Enthusiasm, indeed, 6 O^os iv fi^iiv, is almost al^ 

VOL. L L ^ 


^ sjnonyme of genius ; the moral life in the intell 
tual light, the will in the reason ; and without 
says Seneca, nothing truly great was ever achie^ 
by man. 

Ibid. p. 12. 

And not being able longer to contain, he brake out wit 
lamentable cry, saying, * What shall I do V 

Reader, was this ever your case ? Did you ever see y< 
sins, and feel the burden of them, so as to cry out in 
anguish of your soul, What must I do to be saved ? If i 
you will look on this precious book as a romance or hist( 
which no way concerns you ; you can no more understt 
the meaning of it than if it were wrote iu an unknc 
tongue, for you are yet carnal, dead in your sins, lying in 
arms of the wicked one in false security. But this bool 
spiritual ; it can only be imderstood by spiritually quicke 
souls who have experienced that salyation in the he 
which begins with a sight of sin, a sense of sin, a feai 
destruction and dread of damnation. Such and such o 
conmience Pilgrims from the City of Destruction to 
heavenly kingdom. — Note m Edwards, 

Most true. It is one thing to perceive and ackn< 
ledge this and that particular deed to be sinful, t 
is, contrary to the law of reason or the commandm 
of God in Scripture, and another thing to feel 
within us independent of particular actions, except 
the common ground of them. And it is this lat 
without which no man can become a Christian. 

Ihid, p. 39. 

Now whereas thou sawest that as soon as the first be 
to sweep, the dust did so fly about that the room by '. 
could not be cleansed, but that thou wast almost cho 
therewith; this is to show thee, that the Law, instead 
cleansing the heart (by its working) from sin, doth rev 

THE pilgrim's PROGRESS. 339 

put strength into, and increase it in the soul, even as it doth 
discover and forbid it ; for it doth not give power to subdue. 

See Luther's Table Talk. The chapters in that 
work named " Law and Gospel," contain the very 
marrow of divinity. Still, however, there remains 
much to be done on this subject ; namely, to show 
how the discovery of sin by the Law tends to 
strengthen the sin ; and why it must necessarily 
have this effect, the mode of its action on the appe- 
tites and impetites through the imagination and 
understanding; and to exemplify all this in our 
actual experience. 

Ibid. p. 40. 

Then I saw that one came to Passion, and brought him a 
bag of treasure, and poured it down at his feet ; the which 
he took up, and rejoiced therein, and withal laughed Patience 
to scorn ; but I beheld but awhile, and he had lavished all 
away, and had nothing left him but rags. 

One of the not many instances of faulty allegory 
in The Pilgrim's Progress; that is, it is no alle- 
gory. The beholding " but awhile," and the change 
into " nothing hut rags," is not legitimately imagi- 
nable." A longer time and more interlinks are 
requisite. It is a hybrid compost of usual images 
and generalised words, like the Nile-bom nondescript, 
with a head or tail of organised flesh, and a lump 
of semi-mud for the body. Yet, perhaps, these very 
defects are practically excellencies in relation to the 
intended readers of The Pilgrim's Progress. 

Ibid. p. 43. 

The Interpreter answered, *This is Christ, who con- 
tinually^ with the oil of his grace, maiiit»ix^ \Jcife ^<5^ 


already begun in the heart ; by the means of which, not- 
withstanding what the Devil can do, the souls of his people 
prove gracious stilL And in that thou sawest that the man 
stood behind the wall to maintain the fii'e, this is to teach 
thee, that it is hard for the tempted to see how this work of 
grace is maintained in the soul.* 

This is beautiful ; yet I cannot but think it would 
have been still more appropriate, if the waterpourer 
had been a Mr. Legality, a prudentialist offering his 
calculation of consequences as the moral antidote to 
guilt and crime ; and if the oil-instillator, out of 
sight and from within, had represented the corrupt 
nature of man, that is, the spiritual will corrupted by 
taking up a nature into itself. 


What, then, has the sinner who is the subject of grace no 
hand in keeping up the work of grace in the heart ? No ! 
It is plain Mr. Bunyan was not an Arminian. — Note in 

If by metaphysics we mean those truths of the 
pure reason which always transcend, and not seldom 
appear to contradict, the understanding, or (in the 
words of the great Apostle) spiritual verities which 
can only be spiritually discerned — and this is the 
true and legitimate meaning of metaphysics, ixera ra 
(l>v(Tt,Ka — then I affirm, that this very controversy 
between the Arminians and the Calvinists, in which 
both are partially right in what they affirm, and both 
wholly wrong in what they deny, is a proof that 
without metaphysics there can be no light of faith. 

THE pilgrim's PROGRESS. 341 

Ibid. p. 45. 

I left off to watch and be sober ; I laid the reins upon the 
neck of my lusts. 

This single paragraph proves, in opposition to the 
assertion in the preceding note in Edwards, that in 
Bunyan*s judgment there must be at least a nega- 
tive co-operation of the will of man with the divine 
grace, an energy of non-resistance to the workings 
of the Holy Spirit. But the error of the Calvinists 
is, that they divide the regenerate will in man from 
the will of God, instead of including it. 

Ibid. p. 49. 

So I saw in my dream, that just as Christian came up with 
the Cross, his burden loosed from off his shoulders, and fell 
from off his back, and began to tumble ; and so continued 
to do, till it came to the mouth of the sepulchre, where it 
fell in, and I saw it no more. 

We know that the Son of God is come, and hath 
given us an understanding (or discernment of reason) 
that we may know him that is true, and we are in 
him that is true, even in his son Jesus Christ. This 
is the true God and eternal life, lAttle children, 
keep yourselves from idols. 1 John v. 20. 21. Alas ! 
how many Protestants make a mental idol of the 
Cross, scarcely less injurious to the true faith in the 
Son of God than the wooden crosses and crucifixes of 
the Romanists ! — and this, because they have not 
been taught that Jesus was both the Christ and the 
great symbol of Christ. Strange, that we can explain 
spiritually what to take up the cross of Christ, to be 
crucified with Christ, means ; — yet never ask what 
the Crucifixion itself signifies, but rest satisfied in 
the historic image. That one declaration of the 

342 THE pilgrim's pbogbess. 

Apostle, that by wilful sin we crucify the Son of 
God afresh, might have roused us to nobler thoughts. 

Ibid. p. 62. 

And besides, say they, if we get into the way, what 
matters which way we get in? If we are in, we are in. 
Thou art but in the way, who, as we perceive, came in at the 
gate : and we are also in the way, that came tumbling over 
the wall : wherein now is thy condition better than ours ? 

The allegory is clearly defective, inasmuch as * the 
way ' represents two diverse meanings; — 1. the out- 
ward profession of Christianity, and 2. the inward 
and spiritual grace. But it would be very difficult to 
mend it. 1830. 

In this instance (and it is, I believe, the only one 
in the work,) the allegory degenerates into a sort of 
pun, that is, in the two senses of the word * way,' and 
thus supplies Formal and Hypocrite with an argu- 
ment which Christian cannot fairly answer, or rather 
one to which Bunyan could not make his Christian 
return the proper answer without contradicting the 
allegoric image. For the obvious and only proper 
answer is : No ! you are not in the same ' way ' with 
me, though you are walking on the same *road.' 
But it has a worse defect, namely, that it leaves the 
reader uncertain as to what the writer precisely 
meant, or wished to be understood, by the allegory. 
Did Bunyan refer to the Quakers as rejecting the 
outward Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's 
Supper ? If so, it is the only unspiritual passage 
in the whole beautiful allegory, the only trait of sec- 
tarian narrow-mindedness, and, in Bunyan's own 
language, of legality. But I do not think that this 
was Bunyan's intention. I rather suppose that he 
refers to the Arminians and other Pelagians, who 

THE pilgrim's PROGRESS, 843 

rely on the coincidence of their actions with the 
Gospel precepts for their salvation, whatever the 
ground or root of their conduct may he ; who place, 
in short, the saving virtue in the stream, with little 
or no reference to the source. But it is the faith 
acting in our poor imperfect deeds that alone saves 
us ; and even this faith is not ours, hut the faith of 
the Son of God in us. I am crucified with Christ; 
nevertheless I live: yet not J, hut Christ liveth in me; 
and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by 
the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave ' 
himself for me. Gal. ii. UO, Illustrate this hy a 
simile. Lahouring under chronic bronchitis^ I am 
told to inhale chlorine as a specific remedy ; but I 
can do this only by dissolving a saturated solution of 
the gas in warm water, and then breathing the 
vapour. Now what the aqueous vapour or steam is 
to the chlorine, that our deeds, our outward life, )3toy, 
is to faith. 

Thid. p. 55. 

And the other took directly up the way to Destruction, 
which led him into a wide field, full of dark moimtains, 
where he stumbled and fell, and rose no more. 

This requires a comment. A wide field full of moun- 
tains and of dark mountains, where Hypocrite stumbled 
and fell ! The images here are unusually obscure. 

Thid. p. 70. 

They showed him Moses' rod, the hammer and nail with 
which Jael slew Sisera. 

I question whether it would be possible to instance 
more strikingly the power of a predominant idea (that 
true mental kaleidoscope with richly-coloured glass) 

844 THE pilgrim's fbogress. 

on every object brought before the eye of the mind 
through its medium, than this conjunction of Moses* 
rod with the hammer of the treacherous assassin Jael, 
and similar encomiastic references to the same detes- 
table murder, by Bunyan, and men like Bunyan, 
good, pious, purely-affectioned disciples of the meek 
and holy Jesus ; yet the erroneous preconception 
that whatever is uttered by a Scripture personage 
is, in fact, uttered by the infallible Spirit of God, 
makes Deborahs of them all. But what besides 
ought we to infer from this and similar facts ? Surely, 
that the faith in the heart overpowers and renders 
innocent the errors of the understanding and the 
delusions of the imagination, and that sincerely pious 
men j)urchase, by inconsistency, exemption from the 
practical consequences of particular errors. 

Ibid. p. 76. 

All this is true, and much more which thou hast left 
out, &c. 

This is the best way ; to own Satan's charges, if they be 
true ; yea, to exaggerate them also, to exalt the riches of the 
grace of Christ above all, in pardoning all of them freely. — 
Note in Edwards. 

•That is, to say what we do not believe to be true ! 
Will ye speak wickedly for God, and talk deceitfully 
for him ? said righteous Job. 

Ibid. p. 83. 

One thing I would not let slip : I took notice that no^ 
poor Christian was so confounded, that he did not know his 
own voice ; and thus I perceived it : just when he was come 
over against the mouth of the burning pit, one of the wicked 
ones got behind him, and stepped up softly to him, and 

THE pilgrim's PROGRESS. 345 

whisperingly suggested many grievous blasphemies to him, 
which he verily thought had proceeded from his own mind. 

There is a very beautiful letter of Archbishop 
Leighton's to a lady under a similar distemperature 
of the imagination. * In fact, it can scarcely not 
happen under any weakness and consequent irrita- 
bility of the nerves to persons continually occupied 
with spiritual self-examination. No part of the 
pastoral duties requires more discretion, a greater 
practical psychological science. In this, as in what 
not ? Luther is the great model ; ever reminding the 
individual that not he, but Christ, is to redeem him ; 
and that the way to be redeemed is to think with will, 
mind, and affections on Christ, and not on himself. 
I am a sin -laden being, and Christ has promised to 
loose the whole burden if I but entirely trust in liim. 
To torment myself with the detail of the noisome 
contents of the fardel will but make it stick the 
closer, first to my imagination and then to my un- 
willing will. 


For that he perceived Gk)d was with them, though in that 
dark and dismal state ; and why not, thought he, with me, 
though by reason of the impediment that attends this place, 
I cannot perceive it ? But it may be asked. Why doth the 
Lord suffer his children to walk in such darkness ^ It is for 
his glory : it tries their faith in him, and excites prayer to 
liim : but his love abates not in the least towards them, 
since he lovingly inquires after them. Who is there among you 
that feareth the Lord and walketit in darkness, and hath no 
light ? Then be gives most precious advice to them : Let him 
trust in the Lord, and stay himself upon his Ood, 

Yes ! even in the sincerest believers, being men of 

* The secsond of two 'Letters written to persons under trouble of 
mind.'— Jfrf. 


reflecting and inquiring minds, there will sometimes 
come a wintry season, when the vital sap of faith 
retires to the root, that is, to atheism of the will. 
But though he slay m«, yet will I cling to him. 

Ibid. p. 86. 

And as for the other (Pope), though he be yet alive, he is, 
by reason of age, and also of the many shrewd brushes that 
he met with in his younger days, grown so crazy and stiff in 
his joints, that he can now do little more than sit in his 
cave's mouth, grinning at pilgrims as they go by, and biting 
)u8 nails because he cannot come at them. 

Oh that Blanco White would write in Spanish the 
progress of a pilgrim from the Pope's cave to the 
Evangelist's wicket-gate and the Interpreter's house ! 

Ibid. p. 104. 

And let us assure ourselves that, at the day of doom, men 
shall be judged according to their fruit. It will not be said 
then, " Did you believe ]" but "Were you doers or talkers 
only V and accordingly shall be judged. 

All the doctors of the Sorbonne could not have 
better stated the Gospel medium between Pelagianism 
and Antinomian-Solifidianism, more properly named 
Sterilifidianism. It is, indeed, faith alone that saves 
us ; but it is such a faith as cannot be alone. Puritv 
and beneficence are the epidermis, faith and love the 
cutis vera of Christianity. Morality is the outward 
cloth, faith the lining ; both together form the wed- 
ding-garment given to the true believer in Christ, 
even his own garment of righteousness, which, like 
the loaves and fishes, he mysteriously multiplies. 
The images of the sun in the earthly dew-drops are 


unsubstantial phantoms ; but God's thoughts are 
things : the images of God, of the Sun of Righteous- 
ness, in the spiritual dew-drops are substances, im- 
perishable substances. 

Ibid, p. 154. 

Fine-spun speculations and curious reasonings lead men 
from simple truth and implicit faith into many dangerous 
and destructive errors. The Word records many instances 
of such for our caution. Be warned to study simplicity and 
godly sincerity. — Note in Edwards on Dovbting Castle, 

And pray what does implicit faith lead men into ? 
Transubstantiation and all the abominations of priest- 
worship. And where is the Scriptural authority for 
this implicit faith ? Assuredly not in St. John, who 
tells us that Christ's life is and manifests itself in us 
as the light of man ; that he came to bring light as 
well as immortality. Assuredly not in St. Paul, who 
declares all faith imperfect and perilous without 
insight and understanding ; who prays for us that we 
may comprehend the deep things even of God him- 
self. For the Spirit discerned, and the Spirit by 
"which we discern, are both God ; the Spirit of truth 
through and in Christ from the Father. 

Mournful are the errors into which the zealous but 
unlearned preachers among the dissenting Calvinists 
have fallen respecting absolute election, and discri- 
minative, yet reasonless, grace: — fearful this divorce- 
ment of the Holy Will, the one only Absolute Good, 
that eternally afl&rming itself as the I AM, eternally 
generateth the Word, the absolute Being, the Supreme 
Reason, the Being of all Truth, the Truth of all 
Being : — fearful the divorcement from the reason ; 
fearful the doctrine which maketh God a power of 
darkness, instead of the God of light, the Father of 

348 THE pilgrim's froobess. 

the light which lighteth every man that cometh into 
the world ! This we know, and this we are taught 
hy the holy Apostle Paul ; that without will there is 
no ground or base of sin ; that without the law this 
ground or base cannot become sin ; (hence we do not 
impute sin to the wolf or the tiger, as being without 
or below the law ;) but that with the law cometh light 
into the will ; and by this light the will becometh a 
free, and therefore a responsible, will. Yea ! the 
law is itself light, and the divine light becomes law 
by its relation and opposition to the darkness ; the 
will of God revealed in its opposition to the dark and 
alien will of the fallen Spirit. This freedom, then, 
is the free gift of God ; but does it therefore cease to 
be freedom? All the sophistry of the Predestina- 
rians rests on the false notion of eternity as a sort of 
time antecedent to time. It is timeless, present with 
and in all times. There is an excellent discourse of 
the great Hooker's, affixed with two or three others 
to his Ecclesiastical Polity, on the final perseverance 
of Saints ; * but yet I am very desirous to meet with 
some judicious experimental treatise, in which the 
doctrine, with the Scriptures on which it is grounded, 
is set forth more at large ; as likewise the rules by 
which it may be applied to the purposes of support 
and comfort, without danger of causing presumption, 
and without diminishing the dread of sin. Above 
all, I am anxious to see the subject treated with as 
little reference as possible to the divine predestination 
and foresight ; the argument from the latter being a 
mere identical proposition followed by an assertion of 
God's prescience. Those who will persevere, iviU 
persevere, and God foresees; and as to the proof 
from predestination, that is, that he who predestines 

* Sermon of the certainty and perpetuity of faith in the elect, vol. iii. 
p. 683. Keale's edit— Ed. 

THE pilgrim's PROGRESS. 349 

the end necessarily predestines the adequate means, 
I can more readily imagine logical consequences 
adverse to the sense of responsibility than Christian 
consequences, such as an individual may apply for his 
own edification. And I am persuaded that the doc- 
trine does not need these supports, according, I mean, 
to the ordinary notion of predestination. The pre- 
destinative force of a free agent's own will in certain 
absolute acts, determinations, or elections, and in 
respect of which acts it is one either with the divine 
or the devilish will ; and if the former, the conclusions 
to be drawn from God's goodness, faithfulness, and 
spiritual presence ; these supply grounds of argument 
of a very different character, especially where the 
mind has been prepared by an insight into the error 
and hoUowness of the antithesis between liberty and 

Ibid, p. 178. 

But how contrary to this is the walk and conduct of some 
who profess to be pilgrims, and yet can wilfully and delibe- 
rately go upon the Devil's groimd, and indulge themselves 
in carnal pleasures and sinful diversions. — Note in, Edvxvrds 
on the Enchanted Qrownd, 

But what pleasures are carnal, — what are sinful 
diversions, — so I mean as that I may be able to deter- 
mine what are not? Show us the criterion, the general 
principle; at least explain whether each individual 
case is to be decided for the individual by his own 
experience of the effects of the pleasure or the diver- 
sion, in dulling or distracting his religious feelings ; 
or can a list, a complete list, of all such pleasures be 
made beforehand ? 


PART m. 

In initio, 

I strongly suspect that this third part, which ought 
not to have heen thus conjoined with Bunyan's work, 
was written hy a Roman Catholic priest, for the very 
purpose of counteracting the doctrine of faith so 
strongly enforced in the genuine Progress. 

Ibid, p. 443, in Edwards. 
Against all which evils fasting is the proper remedy. 

It would have heen well if the writer had explained 
exactly what he meant by the fasting, here so strongly 
recommended ; during what period of time abstinence 
from food is to continue, and so on. The effects, I 
imagine, must in good measure depend on the health 
of the individual. In some constitutions, fasting so 
disorders the stomach as to produce the very contrary 
of good; — confusion of mind, loose imaginations 
against the man's own will, and the like. 

In fine. 

One of the most influential arguments, one of 
those the force of which I feel even more than I see, 
for the divinity of the New Testament, and with 
especial weight in the writings of John and Paul, is 
the unspeakable difference between them and all other 
the earliest extant writings of the Christian Church, 
even those of the same age (as, for example, the 
Epistle of Barnabas,) or of the next following, — a 
difference that transcends all degree, and is truly a 
difference in kind. Nay, the catalogue of the works 
written by the Reformers and in the two centuries 


after the Reformation, contain many many volumes 
far superior in Christian light and unction to the best 
of the Fathers. How poor and unevangelic is Hermas 
in comparison with our Pilgrim's Progress ! 



It would make a delightful and instructive essay, 
to draw up a critical and (where possible) biogi-aphical 
account of the Latitudinarian party at Cambridge, 
from the close of the reign of James I. to the latter 
half of Charles II. The greater number were Pla- 
tonists, so called at least, and such they believed 
themselves to be, but more truly Plotinists. Thus 
Cudworth, Dr. Jackson (chaplain of Charles I., and 
vicar of Newcastle-on-Tyne), Henry More, this John 
Smith, and some others. Taylor was a Gassendist, 
or inter Epicureos evangelizanteSy and, as far as I 
know, he is the only exception. They were all 
alike admirers of Grotius, which in Jeremy Taylor 
was consistent with the tone of his philosophy. The 
whole party, however, and a more amiable never 
existed, were scared and disgusted into this by the 
catachrestic language and skeleton half-truths ot the 
systematic divines of the Synod of Dort on the one 
hand, and by the sickly breedings of the Pietists and 
Solomon 's-Song preachers on the other. What they 
all wanted was a pre-inquisition into the mind, as 
part organ, part constituent, of all knowledge, an 
examination of the scales, weights and measures 

* Of Queen's College, Cambridge, 1660. 


themselves abstracted from the objects to be weighed 
or measured by them; in short, a transcendental 
SBSthetic, logic, and noetic. Lord Herbert was at 
the entrance of, nay, already some paces within, the 
shaft and adit of the mine, but he turned abruptly 
back, and the honour of establishing a complete 
TTpoTTaibeCa of philosophy was reserved for Immanuel 
Kant, a century or more afterwards. 

From the confounding of Plotinism with Platonism, 
the Latitudinarian divines fell into the mistake of 
finding in the Greek philosophy many anticipations 
of the Christian Faith, which in fact were but its 
echoes. The inference is as perilous as inevitable, 
namely, that even the mysteries of Christianity 
needed no revelation, having been previously dis- 
covered and set forth by unaided reason. 

The argument from the mere universality of the 
belief, appears to me far stronger in favour of a sur- 
viving soul and a state after death, than for the 
existence of the Supreme Being. In the former, it 
is one doctrine in the Englishman and in the Hot- 
tentot ; the differences are accidents not affecting 
the subject, otherwise than as dififerent seals would 
affect the same wax, though Molly, the maid, used 
her thimble, and Lady Virtuosa an intaglio of the 
most exquisite workmanship. Far otherwise in the 
latter. Mumbo Jumbo, or the cercocheronychous 
Nick-Senior, or whatever score or score thousand 
invisible huge men fear and fancy engender in the 
brain of ignorance to be hatched by the nightmare 
of defenceless and self-conscious weakness — these are 
not the same as, but are toto genere diverse from, the 
una et unica substantia of Spinosa, or the World- 


God of the Stoics. And each of these again is as 
diverse from the living Lord God, the Creator of 
heaven and earth. Nay, this equivoque on God is 
as mischievous as it is illogical ; it is the sword and 
buckler of Deism. 


Besides, when we review our own immortal souls and their 
dependency upon some Almighty mind, we know that we 
neither did nor could produce ourselves, and withal know 
that all that power which lies within the compass of ourselves 
will serve for no other purpose than to apply several pre- 
ezistent things one to another, from whence all generations 
and mutations aiise, which are nothing else but the events 
of different applications and complications of bodies that 
were existent before ; and therefore that which produced that 
substantial life and mind by which we know ourselves, must 
be something much more mighty than we are, and can be no 
less indeed than omnipotent, and must also be the first archi- 
tect and hifjuovpyhs of all other beings, and the perpetual 
supporter of them. 

A Rhodian leap ! Where our knowledge of a cause 
is derived from our knowledge of the effect, which is 
falsely (I think) here supposed, nothing can be logi- 
cally, that is, apodeictically, inferred, but the ade- 
quacy of the former to the latter. The mistake, 
common to Smith, with a hundred other writers, 
arises out of an equivocal use of the word * know.' 
In the scientific sense, as implying insight, and 
which ought to be the sense of the word in this 
place, we might be more truly said t6 know the soul 
by God, than to know God by the soul. 

VOL. L K fc. 


So the Sibyl was noted by Heraclitus as fieuvofiiv<p (rr6fMri 
TcXflurr^ Koi iucaWtl^urra ipQeyyoyLivti^ * as one speaking ridicu- 
lous and unseemly speeches with her furious mouth.' 

This fragment is misquoted and misunderstxx>d : 
for y^Aaora it should be afivpiara unperfumed, 
inornate lays, not redolent of art. — Render it thus : 

Not her's 

To win the sense by words of rhetoric, 
Lip-blossoms breathing perishable sweets ; 
But by the power of the informing Word 
Roll sounding onward through a thousand yean 
Her deep prophetic bodements. 

'Srofiari iiawofiii^ is with ecstatic mouth. 

If the ascetic virtues, or disciplinary exercises, 
derived from the schools of philosophy (Pythagorean, 
Platonic and Stoic) were carried to an extreme in 
the middle ages^ it is most certain that they are at 
present in a far more grievous disproportion underrated 
and neglected. The regvla maxima of the ancient 
aa-Kria-i.^ was to conquer the body by abstracting the 
attention from it. Our maxim is to conciliate the 
body by attending to it, and counteracting or pre- 
cluding one set of sensations by another, the servile 
dependence of the mind on the body remaining the 
same. Instead of the due subservience of the body 
to the mind (the favourite language of our Sidneys 
and Miltons) we hear nothing at present but of 
health, good digestion, pleasurable state of general 
feeling, and the. like.